A web-based system for visualizing upper limb motor performance of Parkinson’s disease patients

Objective To design, develop and set up a web-based system for enabling graphical visualization of upper limb motor performance (ULMP) of Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients to clinicians. Background Sixty-five patients diagnosed with advanced PD have used a test battery, implemented in a touch-screen handheld computer, in their home environment settings over the course of a 3-year clinical study. The test items consisted of objective measures of ULMP through a set of upper limb motor tests (finger to tapping and spiral drawings). For the tapping tests, patients were asked to perform alternate tapping of two buttons as fast and accurate as possible, first using the right hand and then the left hand. The test duration was 20 seconds. For the spiral drawing test, patients traced a pre-drawn Archimedes spiral using the dominant hand, and the test was repeated 3 times per test occasion. In total, the study database consisted of symptom assessments during 10079 test occasions. Methods Visualization of ULMP The web-based system is used by two neurologists for assessing the performance of PD patients during motor tests collected over the course of the said study. The system employs animations, scatter plots and time series graphs to visualize the ULMP of patients to the neurologists. The performance during spiral tests is depicted by animating the three spiral drawings, allowing the neurologists to observe real-time accelerations or hesitations and sharp changes during the actual drawing process. The tapping performance is visualized by displaying different types of graphs. Information presented included distribution of taps over the two buttons, horizontal tap distance vs. time, vertical tap distance vs. time, and tapping reaction time over the test length. Assessments Different scales are utilized by the neurologists to assess the observed impairments. For the spiral drawing performance, the neurologists rated firstly the ‘impairment’ using a 0 (no impairment) – 10 (extremely severe) scale, secondly three kinematic properties: ‘drawing speed’, ‘irregularity’ and ‘hesitation’ using a 0 (normal) – 4 (extremely severe) scale, and thirdly the probable ‘cause’ for the said impairment using 3 choices including Tremor, Bradykinesia/Rigidity and Dyskinesia. For the tapping performance, a 0 (normal) – 4 (extremely severe) scale is used for first rating four tapping properties: ‘tapping speed’, ‘accuracy’, ‘fatigue’, ‘arrhythmia’, and then the ‘global tapping severity’ (GTS). To achieve a common basis for assessment, initially one neurologist (DN) performed preliminary ratings by browsing through the database to collect and rate at least 20 samples of each GTS level and at least 33 samples of each ‘cause’ category. These preliminary ratings were then observed by the two neurologists (DN and PG) to be used as templates for rating of tests afterwards. In another track, the system randomly selected one test occasion per patient and visualized its items, that is tapping and spiral drawings, to the two neurologists. Statistical methods Inter-rater agreements were assessed using weighted Kappa coefficient. The internal consistency of properties of tapping and spiral drawing tests were assessed using Cronbach’s α test. One-way ANOVA test followed by Tukey multiple comparisons test was used to test if mean scores of properties of tapping and spiral drawing tests were different among GTS and ‘cause’ categories, respectively. Results When rating tapping graphs, inter-rater agreements (Kappa) were as follows: GTS (0.61), ‘tapping speed’ (0.89), ‘accuracy’ (0.66), ‘fatigue’ (0.57) and ‘arrhythmia’ (0.33). The poor inter-rater agreement when assessing “arrhythmia” may be as a result of observation of different things in the graphs, among the two raters. When rating animated spirals, both raters had very good agreement when assessing severity of spiral drawings, that is, ‘impairment’ (0.85) and irregularity (0.72). However, there were poor agreements between the two raters when assessing ‘cause’ (0.38) and time-information properties like ‘drawing speed’ (0.25) and ‘hesitation’ (0.21). Tapping properties, that is ‘tapping speed’, ‘accuracy’, ‘fatigue’ and ‘arrhythmia’ had satisfactory internal consistency with a Cronbach’s α coefficient of 0.77. In general, the trends of mean scores of tapping properties worsened with increasing levels of GTS. The mean scores of the four properties were significantly different to each other, only at different levels. In contrast from tapping properties, kinematic properties of spirals, that is ‘drawing speed’, ‘irregularity’ and ‘hesitation’ had a questionable consistency among them with a coefficient of 0.66. Bradykinetic spirals were associated with more impaired speed (mean = 83.7 % worse, P < 0.001) and hesitation (mean = 77.8% worse, P < 0.001), compared to dyskinetic spirals. Both these ‘cause’ categories had similar mean scores of ‘impairment’ and ‘irregularity’. Conclusions In contrast from current approaches used in clinical setting for the assessment of PD symptoms, this system enables clinicians to animate easily and realistically the ULMP of patients who at the same time are at their homes. Dynamic access of visualized motor tests may also be useful when observing and evaluating therapy-related complications such as under- and over-medications. In future, we foresee to utilize these manual ratings for developing and validating computer methods for automating the process of assessing ULMP of PD patients.

Self-reported symptoms and motor tests via telemetry in a 36-month levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel infusion trial

Objective To investigate if a home environment test battery can be used to measure effects of Parkinson’s disease (PD) treatment intervention and disease progression. Background Seventy-seven patients diagnosed with advanced PD were recruited in an open longitudinal 36-month study at 10 clinics in Sweden and Norway; 40 of them were treated with levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) and 37 patients were candidates for switching from oral PD treatment to LCIG. They utilized a mobile device test battery, consisting of self-assessments of symptoms and objective measures of motor function through a set of fine motor tests (tapping and spiral drawings), in their homes. Both the LCIG-naïve and LCIG-non-naïve patients used the test battery four times per day during week-long test periods. Methods Assessments The LCIG-naïve patients used the test battery at baseline (before LCIG), month 0 (first visit; at least 3 months after intraduodenal LCIG), and thereafter quarterly for the first year and biannually for the second and third years. The LCIG-non-naïve patients used the test battery from the first visit, i.e. month 0. Out of the 77 patients, only 65 utilized the test battery; 35 were LCIG-non-naïve and 30 LCIG-naïve. In 20 of the LCIG-naïve patients, assessments with the test battery were available during oral treatment and at least one test period after having started infusion treatment. Three LCIG-naïve patients did not use the test battery at baseline but had at least one test period of assessments thereafter. Hence, n=23 in the LCIG-naïve group. In total, symptom assessments in the full sample (including both patient groups) were collected during 379 test periods and 10079 test occasions. For 369 of these test periods, clinical assessments including UPDRS and PDQ-39 were performed in afternoons at the start of the test periods. The repeated measurements of the test battery were processed and summarized into scores representing patients’ symptom severities over a test period, using statistical methods. Six conceptual dimensions were defined; four subjectively-reported: ‘walking’, ‘satisfied’, ‘dyskinesia’, and ‘off’ and two objectively-measured: ‘tapping’ and ‘spiral’. In addition, an ‘overall test score’ (OTS) was defined to represent the global health condition of the patient during a test period. Statistical methods Change in the test battery scores over time, that is at baseline and follow-up test periods, was assessed with linear mixed-effects models with patient ID as a random effect and test period as a fixed effect of interest. The within-patient variability of OTS was assessed using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), for the two patient groups. Correlations between clinical rating scores and test battery scores were assessed using Spearman’s rank correlations (rho). Results In LCIG-naïve patients, mean OTS compared to baseline was significantly improved from the first test period on LCIG treatment until month 24. However, there were no significant changes in mean OTS scores of LCIG-non-naïve patients, except for worse mean OTS at month 36 (p<0.01, n=16). The mean scores of all subjectively-reported dimensions improved significantly throughout the course of the study, except ‘walking’ at month 36 (p=0.41, n=4). However, there were no significant differences in mean scores of objectively-measured dimensions between baseline and other test periods, except improved ‘tapping’ at month 6 and month 36, and ‘spiral’ at month 3 (p<0.05). The LCIG-naïve patients had a higher within-subject variability in their OTS scores (ICC=0.67) compared to LCIG-non-naïve patients (ICC=0.71). The OTS correlated adequately with total UPDRS (rho=0.59) and total PDQ-39 (rho=0.59). Conclusions In this 3-year follow-up study of advanced PD patients treated with LCIG we found that it is possible to monitor PD progression over time using a home environment test battery. The significant improvements in the mean OTS scores indicate that the test battery is able to measure functional improvement with LCIG sustained over at least 24 months.

Digital spiral analysis for objective assessment of fine motor timing variability in Parkinson's disease

OBJECTIVES: To develop a method for objective assessment of fine motor timing variability in Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients, using digital spiral data gathered by a touch screen device. BACKGROUND: A retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 105 subjects including65 patients with advanced PD (group A), 15 intermediate patients experiencing motor fluctuations (group I), 15 early stage patients (group S), and 10 healthy elderly subjects (HE) were examined. The subjects were asked to perform repeated upper limb motor tasks by tracing a pre-drawn Archimedes spiral as shown on the screen of the device. The spiral tracing test was performed using an ergonomic pen stylus, using dominant hand. The test was repeated three times per test occasion and the subjects were instructed to complete it within 10 seconds. Digital spiral data including stylus position (x-ycoordinates) and timestamps (milliseconds) were collected and used in subsequent analysis. The total number of observations with the test battery were as follows: Swedish group (n=10079), Italian I group (n=822), Italian S group (n = 811), and HE (n=299). METHODS: The raw spiral data were processed with three data processing methods. To quantify motor timing variability during spiral drawing tasks Approximate Entropy (APEN) method was applied on digitized spiral data. APEN is designed to capture the amount of irregularity or complexity in time series. APEN requires determination of two parameters, namely, the window size and similarity measure. In our work and after experimentation, window size was set to 4 and similarity measure to 0.2 (20% of the standard deviation of the time series). The final score obtained by APEN was normalized by total drawing completion time and used in subsequent analysis. The score generated by this method is hence on denoted APEN. In addition, two more methods were applied on digital spiral data and their scores were used in subsequent analysis. The first method was based on Digital Wavelet Transform and Principal Component Analysis and generated a score representing spiral drawing impairment. The score generated by this method is hence on denoted WAV. The second method was based on standard deviation of frequency filtered drawing velocity. The score generated by this method is hence on denoted SDDV. Linear mixed-effects (LME) models were used to evaluate mean differences of the spiral scores of the three methods across the four subject groups. Test-retest reliability of the three scores was assessed after taking mean of the three possible correlations (Spearman’s rank coefficients) between the three test trials. Internal consistency of the methods was assessed by calculating correlations between their scores. RESULTS: When comparing mean spiral scores between the four subject groups, the APEN scores were different between HE subjects and three patient groups (P=0.626 for S group with 9.9% mean value difference, P=0.089 for I group with 30.2%, and P=0.0019 for A group with 44.1%). However, there were no significant differences in mean scores of the other two methods, except for the WAV between the HE and A groups (P<0.001). WAV and SDDV were highly and significantly correlated to each other with a coefficient of 0.69. However, APEN was not correlated to neither WAV nor SDDV with coefficients of 0.11 and 0.12, respectively. Test-retest reliability coefficients of the three scores were as follows: APEN (0.9), WAV(0.83) and SD-DV (0.55). CONCLUSIONS: The results show that the digital spiral analysis-based objective APEN measure is able to significantly differentiate the healthy subjects from patients at advanced level. In contrast to the other two methods (WAV and SDDV) that are designed to quantify dyskinesias (over-medications), this method can be useful for characterizing Off symptoms in PD. The APEN was not correlated to none of the other two methods indicating that it measures a different construct of upper limb motor function in PD patients than WAV and SDDV. The APEN also had a better test-retest reliability indicating that it is more stable and consistent over time than WAV and SDDV.

Automatic spiral analysis for objective assessment of motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease

Objective: To develop a method for objective quantification of PD motor symptoms related to Off episodes and peak dose dyskinesias, using spiral data gathered by using a touch screen telemetry device. The aim was to objectively characterize predominant motor phenotypes (bradykinesia and dyskinesia), to help in automating the process of visual interpretation of movement anomalies in spirals as rated by movement disorder specialists. Background: A retrospective analysis was conducted on recordings from 65 patients with advanced idiopathic PD from nine different clinics in Sweden, recruited from January 2006 until August 2010. In addition to the patient group, 10 healthy elderly subjects were recruited. Upper limb movement data were collected using a touch screen telemetry device from home environments of the subjects. Measurements with the device were performed four times per day during week-long test periods. On each test occasion, the subjects were asked to trace pre-drawn Archimedean spirals, using the dominant hand. The pre-drawn spiral was shown on the screen of the device. The spiral test was repeated three times per test occasion and they were instructed to complete it within 10 seconds. The device had a sampling rate of 10Hz and measured both position and time-stamps (in milliseconds) of the pen tip. Methods: Four independent raters (FB, DH, AJ and DN) used a web interface that animated the spiral drawings and allowed them to observe different kinematic features during the drawing process and to rate task performance. Initially, a number of kinematic features were assessed including ‘impairment’, ‘speed’, ‘irregularity’ and ‘hesitation’ followed by marking the predominant motor phenotype on a 3-category scale: tremor, bradykinesia and/or choreatic dyskinesia. There were only 2 test occasions for which all the four raters either classified them as tremor or could not identify the motor phenotype. Therefore, the two main motor phenotype categories were bradykinesia and dyskinesia. ‘Impairment’ was rated on a scale from 0 (no impairment) to 10 (extremely severe) whereas ‘speed’, ‘irregularity’ and ‘hesitation’ were rated on a scale from 0 (normal) to 4 (extremely severe). The proposed data-driven method consisted of the following steps. Initially, 28 spatiotemporal features were extracted from the time series signals before being presented to a Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) classifier. The features were based on different kinematic quantities of spirals including radius, angle, speed and velocity with the aim of measuring the severity of involuntary symptoms and discriminate between PD-specific (bradykinesia) and/or treatment-induced symptoms (dyskinesia). A Principal Component Analysis was applied on the features to reduce their dimensions where 4 relevant principal components (PCs) were retained and used as inputs to the MLP classifier. Finally, the MLP classifier mapped these components to the corresponding visually assessed motor phenotype scores for automating the process of scoring the bradykinesia and dyskinesia in PD patients whilst they draw spirals using the touch screen device. For motor phenotype (bradykinesia vs. dyskinesia) classification, the stratified 10-fold cross validation technique was employed. Results: There were good agreements between the four raters when rating the individual kinematic features with intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.88 for ‘impairment’, 0.74 for ‘speed’, 0.70 for ‘irregularity’, and moderate agreements when rating ‘hesitation’ with an ICC of 0.49. When assessing the two main motor phenotype categories (bradykinesia or dyskinesia) in animated spirals the agreements between the four raters ranged from fair to moderate. There were good correlations between mean ratings of the four raters on individual kinematic features and computed scores. The MLP classifier classified the motor phenotype that is bradykinesia or dyskinesia with an accuracy of 85% in relation to visual classifications of the four movement disorder specialists. The test-retest reliability of the four PCs across the three spiral test trials was good with Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients of 0.80, 0.82, 0.54 and 0.49, respectively. These results indicate that the computed scores are stable and consistent over time. Significant differences were found between the two groups (patients and healthy elderly subjects) in all the PCs, except for the PC3. Conclusions: The proposed method automatically assessed the severity of unwanted symptoms and could reasonably well discriminate between PD-specific and/or treatment-induced motor symptoms, in relation to visual assessments of movement disorder specialists. The objective assessments could provide a time-effect summary score that could be useful for improving decision-making during symptom evaluation of individualized treatment when the goal is to maximize functional On time for patients while minimizing their Off episodes and troublesome dyskinesias.

Assessing the physical environment of older people’s residential care facilities: development of the Swedish version of the Sheffield Care Environment Assessment Matrix (S-SCEAM)

Background There is emerging evidence that the physical environment is important for health, quality of life and care, but there is a lack of valid instruments to assess health care environments. The Sheffield Care Environment Assessment Matrix (SCEAM), developed in the United Kingdom, provides a comprehensive assessment of the physical environment of residential care facilities for older people. This paper reports on the translation and adaptation of SCEAM for use in Swedish residential care facilities for older people, including information on its validity and reliability. Methods SCEAM was translated into Swedish and back-translated into English, and assessed for its relevance by experts using content validity index (CVI) together with qualitative data. After modification, the validity assessments were repeated and followed by test-retest and inter-rater reliability tests in six units within a Swedish residential care facility that varied in terms of their environmental characteristics. Results Translation and back translation identified linguistic and semantic related issues. The results of the first content validity analysis showed that more than one third of the items had item-CVI (I-CVI) values less than the critical value of 0.78.  After modifying the instrument, the second content validation analysis resulted in I-CVI scores above 0.78, the suggested criteria for excellent content validity. Test-retest reliability showed high stability (96% and 95% for two independent raters respectively), and inter-rater reliability demonstrated high levels of agreement (95% and 94% on two separate rating occasions). Kappa values were very good for test-retest (κ= 0.903 and 0.869) and inter-rater reliability (κ= 0.851 and 0.832). Conclusions Adapting an instrument to a domestic context is a complex and time-consuming process, requiring an understanding of the culture where the instrument was developed and where it is to be used. A team, including the instrument’s developers, translators, and researchers is necessary to ensure a valid translation and adaption. This study showed preliminary validity and reliability evidence for the Swedish version (S-SCEAM) when used in a Swedish context. Further, we believe that the S-SCEAM has improved compared to the original instrument and suggest that it can be used as a foundation for future developments of the SCEAM model.

Load and Season Adapted Solar Collectors

In Sweden solar irradiation and space heating loads are unevenly distributed over the year. Domestic hot water loads may be nearly constant. Test results on solar collector performance are often reported as yearly output of a certain collector at fixed temperatures, e g 25, 50 and 75 C. These data are not suitable for dimensioning of solar systems, because the actual performance of the collector depends heavily on solar fraction and load distribution over the year.At higher latitudes it is difficult to attain high solar fractions for buildings, due to overheating in summer and small marginal output for added collector area. Solar collectors with internal reflectors offer possibilities to evade overheating problems and deliver more energy at seasons when the load is higher. There are methods for estimating the yearly angular irradiation distribution, but there is a lack of methods for describing the load and the storage in such a way as to enable optical design of season and load adapted collectors.This report describes two methods for estimation of solar system performance with relevance for season and load adaption. Results regarding attainable solar fractions as a function of collector features, load profiles, load levels and storage characteristics are reported. The first method uses monthly collector output data at fixed temperatures from the simulation program MINSUN for estimating solar fractions for different load profiles and load levels. The load level is defined as estimated yearly collector output at constant collector temperature divided be yearly load. This table may examplify the results:CollectorLoadLoadSolar Improvementtypeprofile levelfractionover flat plateFlat plateDHW 75 %59 %Load adaptedDHW 75 %66 %12 %Flat plateSpace heating 50 %22 %Load adaptedSpace heating 50 %28 %29 %The second method utilises simulations with one-hour timesteps for collectors connected to a simplified storage and a variable load. Collector output, optical and thermal losses, heat overproduction, load level and storage temperature are presented as functions of solar incidence angles. These data are suitable for optical design of load adapted solar collectors. Results for a Stockholm location indicate that a solar combisystem with a solar fraction around 30 % should have collectors that reduce heat production at solar heights above 30 degrees and have optimum efficiency for solar heights between 8 and 30 degrees.

Testing of combined heating systems for small houses: Improved procedures for whole system test methods : Deliverable 2.3

Dynamic system test methods for heating systems were developed and applied by the institutes SERC and SP from Sweden, INES from France and SPF from Switzerland already before the MacSheep project started. These test methods followed the same principle: a complete heating system – including heat generators, storage, control etc., is installed on the test rig; the test rig software and hardware simulates and emulates the heat load for space heating and domestic hot water of a single family house, while the unit under test has to act autonomously to cover the heat demand during a representative test cycle. Within the work package 2 of the MacSheep project these similar – but different – test methods were harmonized and improved. The work undertaken includes:  • Harmonization of the physical boundaries of the unit under test. • Harmonization of the boundary conditions of climate and load. • Definition of an approach to reach identical space heat load in combination with an autonomous control of the space heat distribution by the unit under test. • Derivation and validation of new six day and a twelve day test profiles for direct extrapolation of test results.   The new harmonized test method combines the advantages of the different methods that existed before the MacSheep project. The new method is a benchmark test, which means that the load for space heating and domestic hot water preparation will be identical for all tested systems, and that the result is representative for the performance of the system over a whole year. Thus, no modelling and simulation of the tested system is needed in order to obtain the benchmark results for a yearly cycle. The method is thus also applicable to products for which simulation models are not available yet. Some of the advantages of the new whole system test method and performance rating compared to the testing and energy rating of single components are:  • Interaction between the different components of a heating system, e.g. storage, solar collector circuit, heat pump, control, etc. are included and evaluated in this test. • Dynamic effects are included and influence the result just as they influence the annual performance in the field. • Heat losses are influencing the results in a more realistic way, since they are evaluated under "real installed" and representative part-load conditions rather than under single component steady state conditions.   The described method is also suited for the development process of new systems, where it replaces time-consuming and costly field testing with the advantage of a higher accuracy of the measured data (compared to the typically used measurement equipment in field tests) and identical, thus comparable boundary conditions. Thus, the method can be used for system optimization in the test bench under realistic operative conditions, i.e. under relevant operating environment in the lab.   This report describes the physical boundaries of the tested systems, as well as the test procedures and the requirements for both the unit under test and the test facility. The new six day and twelve day test profiles are also described as are the validation results.