Proposed Mobility Assessments with Simultaneous Full-Body Inertial Measurement Units and Optical Motion Capture in Healthy Adults and Neurological Patients for Future Validation Studies: Study Protocol.

Healthy adults and neurological patients show unique mobility patterns over the course of their lifespan and disease. Quantifying these mobility patterns could support diagnosing, tracking disease progression and measuring response to treatment. This quantification can be done with wearable technology, such as inertial measurement units (IMUs). Before IMUs can be used to quantify mobility, algorithms need to be developed and validated with age and disease-specific datasets. This study proposes a protocol for a dataset that can be used to develop and validate IMU-based mobility algorithms for healthy adults (18-60 years), healthy older adults (>60 years), and patients with Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, a symptomatic stroke and chronic low back pain. All participants will be measured simultaneously with IMUs and a 3D optical motion capture system while performing standardized mobility tasks and non-standardized activities of daily living. Specific clinical scales and questionnaires will be collected. This study aims at building the largest dataset for the development and validation of IMU-based mobility algorithms for healthy adults and neurological patients. It is anticipated to provide this dataset for further research use and collaboration, with the ultimate goal to bring IMU-based mobility algorithms as quickly as possible into clinical trials and clinical routine.

Validation of the Questionnaire for Symptom Assessment in Pain disorders for Back pain patients (Q-SAP).

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that not only pain intensity but also impairment of quality of life and functionality are important parameters for the evaluation of treatment of chronic low back pain patients. The aim of the study was to validate a specific self-questionnaire for symptom assessment and their influence on quality of life and functionality of chronic low back pain patients (Questionnaire for Symptom Assessment in Pain disorders for back pain patients, Q-SAP). METHODS: The self-questionnaire consists of two parts (for back and if applicable leg symptoms) and was tested in 152 chronic low back pain patients with and without radiculopathy. Test-retest reliability, exploratory factor analysis, convergent validity, criterion-related validity and the sensitivity to detect patient reported changes were investigated. RESULTS: The questionnaire showed a good to excellent test-retest reliability. In the factor analysis nociceptive and neuropathic pain components could be separated and the highest convergent validities were shown for the painDETECT, EQ-5D-3L and the FFbH-R. The criterion-related validity showed concordance of QST and the Q-SAP Back for warmth induced pain and numbness. Regarding the sensitivity to patient-reported changes, a moderate correlation was found for both parts of the questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The Q-SAP was tested as a useful, valid and reliable tool. This new questionnaire records classical nociceptive and neuropathic pain symptoms of chronic low back pain patients depending on their local distribution. Furthermore, the questionnaire records the intensity of these symptoms and their influence on quality of life and functionality and can be used for the evaluation of treatment. SIGNIFICANCE: The Q-SAP Back/Leg is a new self-questionnaire for CLBP patients with or without radiating leg pain that precisely assesses neuropathic and nociceptive symptoms. In contrast to other questionnaires, the Q-SAP Back/Leg evaluates not only symptom intensities but also their impact on the patient's quality of life and functionality. Furthermore, this questionnaire requests the symptoms depending on their anatomical distribution.

Sensory bedside testing: a simple stratification approach for sensory phenotyping.

INTRODUCTION: Stratification of patients according to the individual sensory phenotype has been suggested a promising method to identify responders for pain treatment. However, many state-of-the-art sensory testing procedures are expensive or time-consuming. OBJECTIVES: Therefore, this study aimed to present a selection of easy-to-use bedside devices. METHODS: In total, 73 patients (39 m/34 f) and 20 controls (11 m/9 f) received a standardized laboratory quantitative sensory testing (QST) and a bedside-QST. In addition, 50 patients were tested by a group of nonexperienced investigators to address the impact of training. The sensitivity, specificity, and receiver-operating characteristics were analyzed for each bedside-QST parameter as compared to laboratory QST. Furthermore, the patients' individual sensory phenotype (ie, cluster) was determined using laboratory QST, to select bedside-QST parameters most indicative for a correct cluster allocation. RESULTS: The bedside-QST parameters "loss of cold perception to 22°C metal," "hypersensitivity towards 45°C metal," "loss of tactile perception to Q-tip and 0.7 mm CMS hair," as well as "the allodynia sum score" indicated good sensitivity and specificity (ie, ≳70%). Results of interrater variability indicated that training is necessary for individual parameters (ie, CMS 0.7). For the cluster assessment, the respective bedside quantitative sensory testing (QST) parameter combination indicated the following agreements as compared to laboratory QST stratification: excellent for "sensory loss" (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.91), good for "thermal hyperalgesia" (AUC = 0.83), and fair for "mechanical hyperalgesia" (AUC = 0.75). CONCLUSION: This study presents a selection of bedside parameters to identify the individual sensory phenotype as cost and time efficient as possible.