Remote assessment of myotonic dystrophy type 1: A feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Remote study visits (RSVs) are emerging as important tools for clinical research. We tested the feasibility of using RSVs to evaluate patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1), including remote quantitative assessment of muscle function, and we assessed correlations of remote assessments with patient-reported function. METHODS: Twenty three subjects with DM1 were consented remotely. Toolkits containing a tablet computer, grip dynamometer, and spirometer were shipped to participants. The tablets were loaded with software for video-conferencing and questionnaires about functional impairment, patient experience with technology, and willingness to participate in future remote studies. Grip strength, forced vital capacity, peak cough flow, timed-up-and-go (TUG), and grip myotonia (hand opening time) were determined during RSVs. We assessed correlations of remote assessments with patient-reported outcomes of muscle function and with CTG repeat size. RESULTS: All 23 subjects completed RSVs. 95% of participants were able to complete all components of the remote study. All toolkit components were returned upon completion. Grip strength and TUG demonstrated moderate to strong correlations with self-reported inventories of upper and lower extremity impairment, respectively (ρ = 0.7 and ρ = -0.52). A total of 91% of subjects expressed interest in participating in future RSVs. DISCUSSION: Results of this study support the feasibility of using portable devices and video-conferencing for remote collection of patient-reported outcomes and quantitative assessment of muscle function in DM1.

Brief assessment of cognitive function in myotonic dystrophy: Multicenter longitudinal study using computer-assisted evaluation.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) is known to affect cognitive function, but the best methods to assess central nervous system involvement in multicenter studies have not been determined. In this study our primary aim was to evaluate the potential of computerized cognitive tests to assess cognition in DM1. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, longitudinal, observational study of 113 adults with DM1 at six sites. Psychomotor speed, attention, working memory, and executive functioning were assessed at baseline, 3 months, and 12 months using computerized cognitive tests. Results were compared with assessments of muscle function and patient reported outcomes (PROs), including the Myotonic Dystrophy Health Index (MDHI) and the 5-dimension EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire. RESULTS: Based on intraclass correlation coefficients, computerized cognitive tests had moderate to good reliability for psychomotor speed (0.76), attention (0.82), working memory speed (0.79), working memory accuracy (0.65), and executive functioning (0.87). Performance at baseline was lowest for working memory accuracy (P < .0001). Executive function performance improved from baseline to 3 months (P < .0001), without further changes over 1 year. There was a moderate correlation between poorer executive function and larger CTG repeat size (r = -0.433). There were some weak associations between PROs and cognitive performance. DISCUSSION: Computerized tests of cognition are feasible in multicenter studies of DM1. Poor performance was exhibited in working memory, which may be a useful variable in clinical trials. Learning effects may have contributed to the improvement in executive functioning. The relationship between PROs and cognitive impairment in DM1 requires further study.

Myotonic Dystrophy Health Index: initial evaluation of a disease-specific outcome measure.

INTRODUCTION: In preparation for clinical trials we examine the validity, reliability, and patient understanding of the Myotonic Dystrophy Health Index (MDHI). METHODS: Initially we partnered with 278 myotonic dystrophy type-1 (DM1) patients and identified the most relevant questions for the MDHI. Next, we used factor analysis, patient interviews, and test-retest reliability assessments to refine and evaluate the instrument. Lastly, we determined the capability of the MDHI to differentiate between known groups of DM1 participants. RESULTS: Questions in the final MDHI represent 17 areas of DM1 health. The internal consistency was acceptable in all subscales. The MDHI had a high test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.95) and differentiated between DM1 patient groups with different disease severities. CONCLUSIONS: Initial evaluation of the MDHI provides evidence that it is valid and reliable as an outcome measure for assessing patient-reported health. These results suggest that important aspects of DM1 health may be measured effectively using the MDHI.