Browsing by Author "Lee, Wee-Lih"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A palm-worn device to quantify rigidity in Parkinson’s disease
    (Elsevier B.V., 2019-02) Perera, Thushara; Lee, Wee-Lih; Jones, Mary; Tan, Joy; Proud, Elizabeth; Begg, Angus; Sinclair, Nicholas; Peppard, Richard; McDermott, Hugh
    BACKGROUND: Parkinsonian rigidity is identified on clinical examination as resistance to passive movement. Measurement of rigidity commonly relies on ordinal rating scales (MDS-UPDRS), however instrumented objective measures may provide greater mechanistic insight. NEW METHOD: We present a palm-worn instrument to objectively quantify rigidity on a continuous scale. The device employs a miniature motor to flex the third digit of the hand about the metacarpophalangeal joint whilst transducers record flexion/extension forces. We aim to determine congruence with the MDS-UPDRS, investigate sensitivity to the impact of deep brain stimulation (DBS) and contralateral movement, and make comparisons with healthy individuals. Eight participants with Parkinson's disease underwent evaluation during conditions: on and off DBS, and with and without contralateral limb movement to activate rigidity. During each DBS condition, wash-in/out effects were tracked using both our instrument and two blinded clinical raters. Sixteen healthy volunteers (age-matched/young) served as controls. RESULTS: Rigidity measured using our instrument had moderate agreement with the MDS-UPDRS and showed differences between therapeutic state, activation conditions, and disease/healthy cohorts. Rigidity gradually worsened over a one-hour period after DBS cessation, but improved more rapidly with DBS resumption. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS: Previous attempts to quantify rigidity include manual approaches where a clinician is required to manipulate limbs while sensors passively gather information, or large automated instruments to move the wrist or elbow. CONCLUSION: Given its ability to track changes in rigidity due to therapeutic intervention, our technique could have applications where continuous measurement is required or where a suitably qualified rater is absent.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Validation of a Precision Tremor Measurement System for Multiple Sclerosis
    (Elsevier B.V., 2018-09) Perera, Thushara; Lee, Wee-Lih; Yohanandan, Shivanthan; Nguyen, Ai-Lan; Cruse, Belinda; Boonstra, Frederique; Noffs, Gustavo; Vogel, Adam; Kolbe, Scott; Butzkueven, Helmut; Evans, Andrew; van der Walk, Anneke
    Background: Tremor is a debilitating symptom of Multiple Sclerosis (MS). Little is known about its pathophysiology and treatments are limited. Clinical trials investigating new interventions often rely on subjective clinical rating scales to provide supporting evidence of efficacy. New Method: We present a novel instrument (TREMBAL) which uses electromagnetic motion capture technology to quantify MS tremor. We aim to validate TREMBAL by comparison to clinical ratings using regression modelling with 310 samples of tremor captured from 13 MS participants who performed five different hand exercises during several follow-up visits. Minimum detectable change (MDC) and test-retest reliability were calculated and comparisons were made between MS tremor and data from 12 healthy volunteers. Results: Velocity of the index finger was most congruent with clinical observation. Regression modelling combining different features, sensor configurations, and labelling exercises did not improve results. TREMBAL MDC was 84% of its initial measurement compared to 91% for the clinical rating. Intra-class correlations for test-retest reliability were 0.781 for TREMBAL and 0.703 for clinical ratings. Tremor was lower (p = 0.002) in healthy subjects. Comparison with Existing Methods: Subjective scales have low sensitivity, suffer from ceiling effects, and mitigation against inter-rater variability is challenging. Inertial sensors are ubiquitous, however, their output is nonlinearly related to tremor frequency, compensation is required for gravitational artefacts, and their raw data cannot be intuitively comprehended. Conclusions: TREMBAL, compared with clinical ratings, gave measures in agreement with clinical observation, had marginally lower MDC, and similar test-retest reliability.