RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation provided via telehealth offers an alternative to currently limited in-person health care. Effective rehabilitation depends on accurate and relevant assessments that reliably measure changes in function over time. The reliability of a suite of relevant assessments to measure the impact of rehabilitation on physical function is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to measure the intrarater reliability of mobility-focused physical outcome measures delivered via Zoom (a commonly used telecommunication platform) and interrater reliability, comparing Zoom with in-person measures. METHODS: In this reliability trial, healthy volunteers were recruited to complete 7 mobility-focused outcome measures in view of a laptop, under instructions from a remotely based researcher who undertook the remote evaluations. An in-person researcher (providing the benchmark scores) concurrently recorded their scores. Interrater and intrarater reliability were assessed for Grip Strength, Functional Reach Test, 5-Time Sit to Stand, 3- and 4-Meter Walks and Timed Up and Go, using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots. These tests were chosen because they cover a wide array of physical mobility, strength, and balance constructs; require little to no assistance from a clinician; can be performed in the limits of a home environment; and are likely to be feasible over a telehealth delivery mode. RESULTS: A total of 30 participants (mean age 36.2, SD 12.5 years; n=19, 63% male) completed all assessments. Interrater reliability was excellent for Grip Strength (ICC=0.99) and Functional Reach Test (ICC=0.99), good for 5-Time Sit to Stand (ICC=0.842) and 4-Meter Walk (ICC=0.76), moderate for Timed Up and Go (ICC=0.64), and poor for 3-Meter Walk (ICC=-0.46). Intrarater reliability, accessed by the remote researcher, was excellent for Grip Strength (ICC=0.91); good for Timed Up and Go, 3-Meter Walk, 4-Meter Walk, and Functional Reach (ICC=0.84-0.89); and moderate for 5-Time Sit to Stand (ICC=0.67). Although recorded simultaneously, the following time-based assessments were recorded as significantly longer via Zoom: 5-Time Sit to Stand (1.2 seconds), Timed Up and Go (1.0 seconds), and 3-Meter Walk (1.3 seconds). CONCLUSIONS: Untimed mobility-focused physical outcome measures have excellent interrater reliability between in-person and telehealth measurements. Timed outcome measures took approximately 1 second longer via Zoom, reducing the reliability of tests with a shorter duration. Small time differences favoring in-person attendance are of a similar magnitude to clinically important differences, indicating assessments undertaken using telecommunications technology (Zoom) cannot be compared directly with face-to-face delivery. This has implications for clinicians using blended (ie, some face-to-face and some via the internet) assessments. High intrarater reliability of mobility-focused physical outcome measures has been demonstrated in this study.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Epidural prefrontal cortical stimulation (EpCS) represents a novel therapeutic approach with many unique benefits that can be used for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). OBJECTIVE: To examine the long-term safety and efficacy of EpCS of the frontopolar cortex (FPC) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for treatment of TRD. METHODS: Adults (N = 5) who were 21-80 years old with severe TRD [failure to respond to adequate courses of at least 4 antidepressant medications, psychotherapy and ≥20 on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD24)] were recruited. Participants were implanted with bilateral EpCS over the FPC and DLPFC and received constant, chronic stimulation throughout the five years with Medtronic IPGs. They were followed for 5 years (2/1/2008-10/14/2013). Efficacy of EpCS was assessed with the HRSD24 in an open-label design as the primary outcome measure at five years. RESULTS: All 5 patients continued to tolerate the therapy. The mean improvements from pre-implant baseline on the HRSD24 were [7 months] 54.9% (±37.7), [1 year] 41.2% (±36.6), [2 years] 53.8% (±21.7), and [5 years] 45% (±47). Three of 5 (60%) subjects continued to be in remission at 5 years. There were 5 serious adverse events: 1 electrode 'paddle' infection and 4 device malfunctions, all resulting in suicidal ideation and/or hospitalization. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that chronic bilateral EpCS over the FPC and DLPFC is a promising and potentially durable new technology for treating TRD, both acutely and over 5 years.
