Author
David L. Nyenhuis
Other affiliations: University of Illinois at Chicago, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Michigan State University
Bio: David L. Nyenhuis is an academic researcher from Rush University Medical Center. The author has contributed to research in topics: Dementia & Cognition. The author has an hindex of 21, co-authored 23 publications receiving 9860 citations. Previous affiliations of David L. Nyenhuis include University of Illinois at Chicago & The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Topics: Dementia, Cognition, Vascular dementia, Alzheimer's disease, Stroke
Papers
More filters
Rush University Medical Center1, Medical University of South Carolina2, Columbia University3, Innsbruck Medical University4, University of Lisbon5, University of Pennsylvania6, University of Marburg7, University of Paris8, University of Rochester9, Baylor College of Medicine10, Autonomous University of Barcelona11, University of Toronto12, University College London13, Wayne State University14, University of Illinois at Chicago15, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai16, University of Toulouse17, Leiden University18, University of Massachusetts Medical School19
TL;DR: The combined clinimetric results of this study support the validity of the MDS‐UPDRS for rating PD.
Abstract: We present a clinimetric assessment of the Movement Disorder Society (MDS)-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS). The MDS-UDPRS Task Force revised and expanded the UPDRS using recommendations from a published critique. The MDS-UPDRS has four parts, namely, I: Non-motor Experiences of Daily Living; II: Motor Experiences of Daily Living; III: Motor Examination; IV: Motor Complications. Twenty questions are completed by the patient/caregiver. Item-specific instructions and an appendix of complementary additional scales are provided. Movement disorder specialists and study coordinators administered the UPDRS (55 items) and MDS-UPDRS (65 items) to 877 English speaking (78% non-Latino Caucasian) patients with Parkinson's disease from 39 sites. We compared the two scales using correlative techniques and factor analysis. The MDS-UPDRS showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.79-0.93 across parts) and correlated with the original UPDRS (rho = 0.96). MDS-UPDRS across-part correlations ranged from 0.22 to 0.66. Reliable factor structures for each part were obtained (comparative fit index > 0.90 for each part), which support the use of sum scores for each part in preference to a total score of all parts. The combined clinimetric results of this study support the validity of the MDS-UPDRS for rating PD.
4,589 citations
TL;DR: This scientific statement provides an overview of the evidence on vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia and provides evidence that subcortical forms of VCI with white matter hyperintensities and small deep infarcts are common and risk markers for VCI are the same as traditional risk factors for stroke.
Abstract: Background and Purpose—This scientific statement provides an overview of the evidence on vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia. Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment ...
2,731 citations
University of Western Ontario1, Cornell University2, Mayo Clinic3, Erasmus University Rotterdam4, University of Illinois at Chicago5, University of Toronto6, Washington University in St. Louis7, University of California, Davis8, National Institutes of Health9, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust10, University of California, Los Angeles11, University of New Mexico12, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich13
TL;DR: Using the same standards will help identify individuals in the early stages of cognitive impairment, will make studies comparable, and by integrating knowledge, will accelerate the pace of progress.
Abstract: Background and Purpose—One in 3 individuals will experience a stroke, dementia or both. Moreover, twice as many individuals will have cognitive impairment short of dementia as either stroke or dementia. The commonly used stroke scales do not measure cognition, while dementia criteria focus on the late stages of cognitive impairment, and are heavily biased toward the diagnosis of Alzheimer disease. No commonly agreed standards exist for identifying and describing individuals with cognitive impairment, particularly in the early stages, and especially with cognitive impairment related to vascular factors, or vascular cognitive impairment. Methods—The National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) and the Canadian Stroke Network (CSN) convened researchers in clinical diagnosis, epidemiology, neuropsychology, brain imaging, neuropathology, experimental models, biomarkers, genetics, and clinical trials to recommend minimum, common, clinical and research standards for the description and study of vascular cognitive impairment. Results—The results of these discussions are reported herein. Conclusions—The development of common standards represents a first step in a process of use, validation and refinement. Using the same standards will help identify individuals in the early stages of cognitive impairment, will make studies comparable, and by integrating knowledge, will accelerate the pace of progress. (Stroke. 2006;37:2220-2241.)
1,457 citations
Rush University Medical Center1, Columbia University2, Carlos III Health Institute3, Innsbruck Medical University4, University of Pennsylvania5, Medical University of South Carolina6, University of Bonn7, University of Rochester8, Baylor College of Medicine9, University of Toronto10, University College London11, Wayne State University12, University of Illinois at Chicago13, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai14, University of Toulouse15, Leiden University16, University of Massachusetts Medical School17
TL;DR: The MDS‐UPDRS retains the UPDRS structure of four parts with a total summed score, but the parts have been modified to provide a section that integrates nonmotor elements of PD: I, Nonmotor Experiences of Daily Living; II, Motor Exper experiences of daily Living; III, Motor Examination; and IV, Motor Complications.
Abstract: This article presents the revision process, major innovations, and clinimetric testing program for the Movement Disorder Society (MDS)-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), known as the MDS-UPDRS. The UPDRS is the most widely used scale for the clinical study of Parkinson's disease (PD). The MDS previously organized a critique of the UPDRS, which cited many strengths, but recommended revision of the scale to accommodate new advances and to resolve problematic areas. An MDS-UPDRS committee prepared the revision using the recommendations of the published critique of the scale. Subcommittees developed new material that was reviewed by the entire committee. A 1-day face-to-face committee meeting was organized to resolve areas of debate and to arrive at a working draft ready for clinimetric testing. The MDS-UPDRS retains the UPDRS structure of four parts with a total summed score, but the parts have been modified to provide a section that integrates nonmotor elements of PD: I, Nonmotor Experiences of Daily Living; II, Motor Experiences of Daily Living; III, Motor Examination; and IV, Motor Complications. All items have five response options with uniform anchors of 0 = normal, 1 = slight, 2 = mild, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe. Several questions in Part I and all of Part II are written as a patient/caregiver questionnaire, so that the total rater time should remain approximately 30 minutes. Detailed instructions for testing and data acquisition accompany the MDS-UPDRS in order to increase uniform usage. Multiple language editions are planned. A three-part clinimetric program will provide testing of reliability, validity, and responsiveness to interventions. Although the MDS-UPDRS will not be published until it has successfully passed clinimetric testing, explanation of the process, key changes, and clinimetric programs allow clinicians and researchers to understand and participate in the revision process.
1,086 citations
TL;DR: The Profile of Mood States (POMS; McNair, Lorr, & Droppleman) is widely used to assess mood states, but the utility of the POMS has been restricted by the lack of normative data from the general population.
Abstract: The Profile of Mood States (POMS; McNair, Lorr, & Droppleman) is widely used to assess mood states However, the utility of the POMS has been restricted by the lack of normative data from the general population We report on our adult (N = 400) and geriatric (N = 170) POMS standardization samples Both groups were age-, gender-, and race-stratified according to 1990 census data We also report on convergent and discriminant validity of POMS scales, using a multitrait, multimethod paradigm
327 citations
Cited by
More filters
9,362 citations
Rush University Medical Center1, Medical University of South Carolina2, Columbia University3, Innsbruck Medical University4, University of Lisbon5, University of Pennsylvania6, University of Marburg7, University of Paris8, University of Rochester9, Baylor College of Medicine10, Autonomous University of Barcelona11, University of Toronto12, University College London13, Wayne State University14, University of Illinois at Chicago15, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai16, University of Toulouse17, Leiden University18, University of Massachusetts Medical School19
TL;DR: The combined clinimetric results of this study support the validity of the MDS‐UPDRS for rating PD.
Abstract: We present a clinimetric assessment of the Movement Disorder Society (MDS)-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS). The MDS-UDPRS Task Force revised and expanded the UPDRS using recommendations from a published critique. The MDS-UPDRS has four parts, namely, I: Non-motor Experiences of Daily Living; II: Motor Experiences of Daily Living; III: Motor Examination; IV: Motor Complications. Twenty questions are completed by the patient/caregiver. Item-specific instructions and an appendix of complementary additional scales are provided. Movement disorder specialists and study coordinators administered the UPDRS (55 items) and MDS-UPDRS (65 items) to 877 English speaking (78% non-Latino Caucasian) patients with Parkinson's disease from 39 sites. We compared the two scales using correlative techniques and factor analysis. The MDS-UPDRS showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.79-0.93 across parts) and correlated with the original UPDRS (rho = 0.96). MDS-UPDRS across-part correlations ranged from 0.22 to 0.66. Reliable factor structures for each part were obtained (comparative fit index > 0.90 for each part), which support the use of sum scores for each part in preference to a total score of all parts. The combined clinimetric results of this study support the validity of the MDS-UPDRS for rating PD.
4,589 citations
TL;DR: A thorough understanding of the broad spectrum of clinical manifestations of PD is essential to the proper diagnosis of the disease and genetic mutations or variants, neuroimaging abnormalities and other tests are potential biomarkers that may improve diagnosis and allow the identification of persons at risk.
Abstract: Objective: Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a progressive neurological disorder characterised by a large number of motor and non-motor features that can impact on function to a variable degree. This review describes the clinical characteristics of PD with emphasis on those features that differentiate the disease from other parkinsonian disorders. Methods: A MedLine search was performed to identify studies that assess the clinical characteristics of PD. Search terms included “Parkinson’s disease”, “diagnosis” and “signs and symptoms”. Results: Because there is no definitive test for the diagnosis of PD, the disease must be diagnosed based on clinical criteria. Rest tremor, bradykinesia, rigidity and loss of postural reflexes are generally considered the cardinal signs of PD. The presence and specific presentation of these features are used to differentiate PD from related parkinsonian disorders. Other clinical features include secondary motor symptoms (eg, hypomimia, dysarthria, dysphagia, sialorrhoea, micrographia, shuffling gait, festination, freezing, dystonia, glabellar reflexes), non-motor symptoms (eg, autonomic dysfunction, cognitive/neurobehavioral abnormalities, sleep disorders and sensory abnormalities such as anosmia, paresthesias and pain). Absence of rest tremor, early occurrence of gait difficulty, postural instability, dementia, hallucinations, and the presence of dysautonomia, ophthalmoparesis, ataxia and other atypical features, coupled with poor or no response to levodopa, suggest diagnoses other than PD. Conclusions: A thorough understanding of the broad spectrum of clinical manifestations of PD is essential to the proper diagnosis of the disease. Genetic mutations or variants, neuroimaging abnormalities and other tests are potential biomarkers that may improve diagnosis and allow the identification of persons at risk.
4,349 citations
University of Edinburgh1, University of Calgary2, Medical University of Graz3, The George Institute for Global Health4, University of Cambridge5, VU University Amsterdam6, University of British Columbia7, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre8, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases9, Paris Diderot University10, University of California, Davis11, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre12, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich13, University College London14, Harvard University15, University of Western Ontario16, The Chinese University of Hong Kong17, Maastricht University18, University of Florence19, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg20, Newcastle University21, National University of Singapore22, Leiden University Medical Center23, University of Saint Mary24
TL;DR: This Position Paper summarises the main outcomes of this international effort to provide the STandards for ReportIng Vascular changes on nEuroimaging (STRIVE).
Abstract: Cerebral small vessel disease (SVD) is a common accompaniment of ageing. Features seen on neuroimaging include recent small subcortical infarcts, lacunes, white matter hyperintensities, perivascular spaces, microbleeds, and brain atrophy. SVD can present as a stroke or cognitive decline, or can have few or no symptoms. SVD frequently coexists with neurodegenerative disease, and can exacerbate cognitive deficits, physical disabilities, and other symptoms of neurodegeneration. Terminology and definitions for imaging the features of SVD vary widely, which is also true for protocols for image acquisition and image analysis. This lack of consistency hampers progress in identifying the contribution of SVD to the pathophysiology and clinical features of common neurodegenerative diseases. We are an international working group from the Centres of Excellence in Neurodegeneration. We completed a structured process to develop definitions and imaging standards for markers and consequences of SVD. We aimed to achieve the following: first, to provide a common advisory about terms and definitions for features visible on MRI; second, to suggest minimum standards for image acquisition and analysis; third, to agree on standards for scientific reporting of changes related to SVD on neuroimaging; and fourth, to review emerging imaging methods for detection and quantification of preclinical manifestations of SVD. Our findings and recommendations apply to research studies, and can be used in the clinical setting to standardise image interpretation, acquisition, and reporting. This Position Paper summarises the main outcomes of this international effort to provide the STandards for ReportIng Vascular changes on nEuroimaging (STRIVE).
3,691 citations
Montreal General Hospital1, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases2, University of Pennsylvania3, Innsbruck Medical University4, Mount Sinai Hospital5, University of Marburg6, University of Navarra7, University of California, San Diego8, Toronto Western Hospital9, Neuroscience Research Australia10, Rush University Medical Center11, Capital Medical University12, Radboud University Nijmegen13, Mayo Clinic14, University of Kiel15
TL;DR: The Movement Disorder Society PD Criteria retain motor parkinsonism as the core feature of the disease, defined as bradykinesia plus rest tremor or rigidity, and two levels of certainty are delineated: clinically established PD and probable PD.
Abstract: This document presents the Movement Disorder Society Clinical Diagnostic Criteria for Parkinson's disease (PD). The Movement Disorder Society PD Criteria are intended for use in clinical research but also may be used to guide clinical diagnosis. The benchmark for these criteria is expert clinical diagnosis; the criteria aim to systematize the diagnostic process, to make it reproducible across centers and applicable by clinicians with less expertise in PD diagnosis. Although motor abnormalities remain central, increasing recognition has been given to nonmotor manifestations; these are incorporated into both the current criteria and particularly into separate criteria for prodromal PD. Similar to previous criteria, the Movement Disorder Society PD Criteria retain motor parkinsonism as the core feature of the disease, defined as bradykinesia plus rest tremor or rigidity. Explicit instructions for defining these cardinal features are included. After documentation of parkinsonism, determination of PD as the cause of parkinsonism relies on three categories of diagnostic features: absolute exclusion criteria (which rule out PD), red flags (which must be counterbalanced by additional supportive criteria to allow diagnosis of PD), and supportive criteria (positive features that increase confidence of the PD diagnosis). Two levels of certainty are delineated: clinically established PD (maximizing specificity at the expense of reduced sensitivity) and probable PD (which balances sensitivity and specificity). The Movement Disorder Society criteria retain elements proven valuable in previous criteria and omit aspects that are no longer justified, thereby encapsulating diagnosis according to current knowledge. As understanding of PD expands, the Movement Disorder Society criteria will need continuous revision to accommodate these advances.
3,421 citations