4.5 Review

Wrist Rigidity Evaluation in Parkinson's Disease: A Scoping Review

期刊

HEALTHCARE
卷 10, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10112178

关键词

rigidity assessment; Parkinson's disease; wrist rigidity

资金

  1. National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq)
  2. Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) (CAPES-Program) [CAPES/DFATD-88887.159028/2017-00, CAPES/COFECUB-88881.370894/2019-01]
  3. Foundation for Research Support of the State of Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG)
  4. CNPq, Brazil [304818/2018-6, 307754/2020-0, 304533/2020-3, 309525/2021-7]
  5. CAPES/COFECUB [88887.612297/2021-00, 88887.628121/2021-01, 88887.662002/2022-00, MA957/20 2019-2023]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A scope review was conducted to compile the main methods used for assessing wrist rigidity in Parkinson's disease (PD) and to study their validity and reliability. Twenty-eight studies were included, which presented various quantitative assessment methods using instruments such as force and inertial sensors. These methods showed good correlation with clinical scales and were useful for detecting and monitoring rigidity. However, developing a standardized quantitative method for assessing rigidity in clinical practice remains a challenge.
(1) Background: One of the main cardinal signs of Parkinson's disease (PD) is rigidity, whose assessment is important for monitoring the patient's recovery. The wrist is one of the joints most affected by this symptom, which has a great impact on activities of daily living and consequently on quality of life. The assessment of rigidity is traditionally made by clinical scales, which have limitations due to their subjectivity and low intra- and inter-examiner reliability. (2) Objectives: To compile the main methods used to assess wrist rigidity in PD and to study their validity and reliability, a scope review was conducted. (3) Methods: PubMed, IEEE /IET Electronic Library, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, Bireme, Google Scholar and Science Direct databases were used. (4) Results: Twenty-eight studies were included. The studies presented several methods for quantitative assessment of rigidity using instruments such as force and inertial sensors. (5) Conclusions: Such methods present good correlation with clinical scales and are useful for detecting and monitoring rigidity. However, the development of a standard quantitative method for assessing rigidity in clinical practice remains a challenge.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据