Rett Syndrome With and Without Detected MECP2 Mutations: an Attempt to Redefine Phenotypes

Background: The diagnosis of Rett syndrome (RTT) is based on a set of clinical criteria, irrespective of mutation status. The aims of this study were (1) to define the clinical differences existing between patients with Rett syndrome with (Group I) and without a MECP2 mutation (Group II), and (2) to characterize the phenotypes associated with the more common MECP2 mutations. Patients and Methods: We analyzed 87 patients fulfilling the clinical criteria for RTT. All were observed and videotaped by the same paediatric neurologist. Seven common mutations were considered separately, and associated clinical features analysed. Results: Comparing Group I and II, we found differences concerning psychomotor development prior to onset, acquisition of propositive manipulation and language, and evolving autistic traits. Based on age at observation, we found differences in eye pointing, microcephaly, growth, number of stereotypies, rigidity, ataxia and ataxic-rigid gait, and severity score. Patients with truncating differed from those with missense mutations regarding acquisition of propositive words and independent gait, before the beginning of the disease, and microcephaly, growth, foot length, dystonia, rigidity and severity score, at the time of observation. Patients with the R168X mutation had a more severe phenotype, whereas those with R133C showed a less severe one. Patients with R294X had a hyperactive behaviour, and those with T158M seemed to be particularly ataxic and rigid. Conclusion: A clear regressive period (with loss of prehension and language, deceleration of growth) and the presence of more than three different stereotypies, rigidity and ataxic-rigid gait seemed to be very helpful in differentiating Group I from Group II.

Development of The Viking Speech Scale to Classify the Speech of Children with Cerebral Palsy

Surveillance registers monitor the prevalence of cerebral palsy and the severity of resulting impairments across time and place. The motor disorders of cerebral palsy can affect children’s speech production and limit their intelligibility. We describe the development of a scale to classify children’s speech performance for use in cerebral palsy surveillance registers, and its reliability across raters and across time. Speech and language therapists, other healthcare professionals and parents classified the speech of 139 children with cerebral palsy (85 boys, 54 girls; mean age 6.03 years, SD 1.09) from observation and previous knowledge of the children. Another group of health professionals rated children’s speech from information in their medical notes. With the exception of parents, raters reclassified children’s speech at least four weeks after their initial classification. Raters were asked to rate how easy the scale was to use and how well the scale described the child’s speech production using Likert scales. Inter-rater reliability was moderate to substantial (k > .58 for all comparisons). Test–retest reliability was substantial to almost perfect for all groups (k > .68). Over 74% of raters found the scale easy or very easy to use; 66% of parents and over 70% of health care professionals judged the scale to describe children’s speech well or very well. We conclude that the Viking Speech Scale is a reliable tool to describe the speech performance of children with cerebral palsy, which can be applied through direct observation of children or through case note review.