Search

Background: Progressive loss of standing balance is a feature of Friedreich's ataxia (FRDA). Objectives: This study aimed to identify standing balance conditions and digital postural sway measures that best discriminate between FRDA and healthy controls (HC). We assessed test–retest reliability and correlations between sway measures and clinical scores. Methods: Twenty‐eight subjects with FRDA and 20 HC completed six standing conditions: feet apart, feet together, and feet tandem, both with eyes opened (EO) and eyes closed. Sway was measured using a wearable sensor on the lumbar spine for 30 seconds. Test completion rate, test–retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficients, and areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) for each measure were compared to identify distinguishable FRDA sway characteristics from HC. Pearson correlations were used to evaluate the relationships between discriminative measures and clinical scores. Results: Three of the six standing conditions had completion rates over 70%. Of these three conditions, natural stance and feet together with EO showed the greatest completion rates. All six of the sway measures' mean values were significantly different between FRDA and HC. Four of these six measures discriminated between groups with >0.9 AUC in all three conditions. The Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale Upright Stability and Total scores correlated with sway measures with P‐values <0.05 and r‐values (0.63–0.86) and (0.65–0.81), respectively. Conclusion: Digital postural sway measures using wearable sensors are discriminative and reliable for assessing standing balance in individuals with FRDA. Natural stance and feet together stance with EO conditions suggest use in clinical trials for FRDA. © 2024 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Maintaining balance is crucial for independence and quality of life. Loss of balance is a hallmark of spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA). Objective: The aim of this study was to identify which standing balance conditions and digital measures of body sway were most discriminative, reliable, and valid for quantifying balance in SCA. Methods: Fifty-three people with SCA (13 SCA1, 13 SCA2, 14 SCA3, and 13 SCA6) and Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) scores 9.28 ( 4.36 and 31 healthy controls were recruited. Subjects stood in six test conditions (natural stance, feet together and tandem, each with eyes open [EO] and eyes closed [EC]) with an inertial sensor on their lower back for 30 seconds (2). We compared test completion rate, test–retest reliability, and areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for seven digital sway measures. Pearson’s correlations related sway with the SARA and the Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Ataxia (PROM ataxia). Results: Most individuals with SCA (85%–100%) could stand for 30 seconds with natural stance EO or EC, and with feet together EO. The most discriminative digital sway measures (path length, range, area, and root mean square) from the two most reliable and discriminative conditions (natural stance EC and feet together EO) showed intraclass correlation coefficients from 0.70 to 0.91 and AUCs from 0.83 to 0.93. Correlations of sway with SARA were significant (maximum r = 0.65 and 0.73). Correlations with PROM ataxia were mild to moderate (maximum r = 0.56 and 0.34). Conclusion: Inertial sensor measures of extent of postural sway in conditions of natural stance EC and feet together stance EO were discriminative, reliable, and valid for monitoring SCA. © 2024 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Physical activity and sleep monitoring in daily life provide vital information to track health status and physical fitness. The aim of this study was to establish concurrent validity for the new Opal Actigraphy solution in relation to the widely used ActiGraph GT9X for measuring physical activity from accelerometry epic counts (sedentary to vigorous levels) and sleep periods in daily life. Twenty participants (age 56 + 22 years) wore two wearable devices on each wrist for 7 days and nights, recording 3-D accelerations at 30 Hz. Bland–Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) assessed validity (agreement) and test–retest reliability between ActiGraph and Opal Actigraphy sleep durations and activity levels, as well as between the two different versions of the ActiGraph. ICCs showed excellent reliability for physical activity measures and moderate-to-excellent reliability for sleep measures between Opal versus Actigraph GT9X and between GT3X versus GT9X. Bland–Altman plots and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) also show a comparable performance (within 10%) between Opal and ActiGraph and between the two ActiGraph monitors across activity and sleep measures. In conclusion, physical activity and sleep measures using Opal Actigraphy demonstrate performance comparable to that of ActiGraph, supporting concurrent validation. Opal Actigraphy can be used to quantify activity and monitor sleep patterns in research and clinical studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]