Highlights
- •We need an appropriate biomarker for spinocerebellar degeneration (SCD).
- •We performed gait analysis on patients with pure cerebellar type SCD.
- •Acceleration signals were measured by two sets of triaxial accelerometers.
- •The average amplitude of medial-lateral of straight gait is a biomarker.
- •Gait analysis is a quantitative and concise evaluation scale for cerebellar ataxia.
Abstract
An appropriate biomarker for spinocerebellar degeneration (SCD) has not been identified.
Here, we performed gait analysis on patients with pure cerebellar type SCD and assessed
whether the obtained data could be used as a neurophysiological biomarker for cerebellar
ataxia. We analyzed 25 SCD patients, 25 patients with Parkinson's disease as a disease
control, and 25 healthy control individuals. Acceleration signals during 6 min of walking and 1 min of standing were measured by two sets of triaxial accelerometers that were secured
with a fixation vest to the middle of the lower and upper back of each subject. We
extracted two gait parameters, the average and the coefficient of variation of motion
trajectory amplitude, from each acceleration component. Then, each component was analyzed
by correlation with the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) and the
Berg Balance Scale (BBS). Compared with the gait control of healthy subjects and concerning
correlation with severity and disease specificity, our results suggest that the average
amplitude of medial-lateral (upper back) of straight gait is a physiological biomarker
for cerebellar ataxia. Our results suggest that gait analysis is a quantitative and
concise evaluation scale for the severity of cerebellar ataxia.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of the Neurological SciencesAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia: development of a new clinical scale.Neurology. 2006; 66: 1717-1720
- Reliability of the Japanese version of the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA).Brain Nerve. 2009; 61: 591-595
- Measuring balance in the elderly: validation of an instrument.Can. J. Public Health. 1992; 83: S7-11
- Reliability of the Japanese version of the Berg balance scale.Intern. Med. 2014; 53: 1621-1624
- ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test.Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2002; 166: 111-117
- Efficacy and safety of leuprorelin in patients with spinal and bulbar muscular atrophy (JASMITT study): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.Lancet Neurol. 2010; 9: 875-884
- Visualising gait symmetry/asymmetry from acceleration data.Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 2015; 18: 923-930
- Usefulness of the Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA).J. Neurol. Sci. 2008; 266: 164-166
- Deficits in scaling of gait force and cycle in parkinsonian gait identified by long-term monitoring of acceleration with the portable gait rhythmogram.ISRN Neurol. 2012; 2012: 306816
- Acceleration patterns of the head and pelvis when walking on level and irregular surfaces.Gait Posture. 2003; 18: 35-46
- Responsiveness of different rating instruments in spinocerebellar ataxia patients.Neurology. 2010; 74: 678-684
- The natural history of multiple system atrophy: a prospective European cohort study.Lancet Neurol. 2013; 12: 264-274
- The natural history of spinocerebellar ataxia type 1, 2, 3, and 6: a 2-year follow-up study.Neurology. 2011; 77: 1035-1041
- A0001 in Friedreich ataxia: biochemical characterization and effects in a clinical trial.Mov. Disord. 2012; 27: 1026-1033
Article info
Publication history
Published online: September 03, 2015
Accepted:
September 2,
2015
Received in revised form:
August 30,
2015
Received:
May 26,
2015
Identification
Copyright
© 2015 Elsevier B.V. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
