Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37609661›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023

Useful outcome measures in INPH patients evaluation.

Laura Mori, Federica Collino, Annalisa Marzi, Lucia Pellegrino, Marta Ponzano, Davide Del Chiaro, Sara Maestrini, Stefano Caneva, Matteo Pardini, Pietro Fiaschi and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Laura MoriDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Federica CollinoDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Annalisa MarziDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Lucia PellegrinoDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Marta PonzanoDepartment of Health Sciences (DISSAL), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Davide Del ChiaroDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Sara MaestriniDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Stefano CanevaDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Matteo PardiniDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Pietro FiaschiDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Gianluigi ZonaDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Carlo TrompettoDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Ligurian INPH Study
University of Genoa · ITOspedale Policlinico San Martino · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (INPH) is a neurological disorder that is potentially reversible and clinically characterized by a specific triad of symptoms, including gait disturbance, cognitive disorders, and urinary incontinence. In INPH assessment, the most commonly used test is the Timed Up and Go test (TUG), but a more comprehensive assessment would be necessary. The first aim of the present study is to verify the sensitivity of a protocol with both clinical and instrumental outcome measures for gait and balance in recognizing INPH patients. The second aim is to verify the most important spatio-temporal parameters in INPH assessment and their possible correlations with clinical outcome measures. Methods: Between January 2019 and June 2022, we evaluated 70 INPH subjects. We assessed balance performances with the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and TUG, both single (ST) and dual task (DT). We also performed an instrumental gait assessment with the GAITRite electronic walkway system, asking the patients to walk on the carpet for one minute at normal speed, fast speed, and while performing a dual task. We compared the results with those of 20 age-matched healthy subjects (HS). Results: INPH patients obtained statistically significant lower scores at the BBS, SPPB, and TUG DT but not at the TUG ST, likely because the DT involves cognitive factors altered in these subjects. Concerning instrumental gait evaluation, we found significant differences between HS and INPH patients in almost all spatio-temporal parameters except cadence, which is considered a relevant factor in INPH guidelines. We also found significant correlations between balance outcome measures and gait parameters. Discussion: Our results confirm the usefulness of BBS and suggest improving the assessment with SPPB. Although the TUG ST is the most commonly used test in the literature to evaluate INPH performances, it does not identify INPH; the TUG DT, instead, might be more useful. The GAITRite system is recognized as a quick and reliable tool to assess walking abilities and spatio-temporal parameters in INPH patients, and the most useful parameters are stride length, stride width, speed, and the percentage of double support. Both clinical and instrumental evaluation may be useful in recognizing subjects at risk for falls.

Indexed as

balancegait analysishydrocephalusnormal pressureoutcomewalking

Identifiers

PMID37609661
PMCPMC10441237
OpenAlexW4385708641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.