000285817 001__ 285817
000285817 005__ 20260402150601.0
000285817 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1093/braincomms/fcag100
000285817 0247_ $$2pmid$$apmid:41924696
000285817 0247_ $$2pmc$$apmc:PMC13037577
000285817 037__ $$aDZNE-2026-00353
000285817 041__ $$aEnglish
000285817 082__ $$a610
000285817 1001_ $$aOff, Johannes$$b0
000285817 245__ $$aPsychometric reliability of patient-reported visual analogue scales in subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation programming for Parkinson's disease.
000285817 260__ $$a[Oxford]$$bOxford University Press$$c2026
000285817 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000285817 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000285817 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1775135061_15916
000285817 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000285817 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000285817 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000285817 520__ $$aSubthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation is an established therapy for Parkinson's disease, yet its programming relies heavily on subjective patient feedback. Visual analogue scales have been proposed to structure patient-reported outcome measures during programming, but their psychometric reliability has not been systematically evaluated. In this study, fifteen patients with bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation completed four structured experiments to assess the reliability of visual analogue scales: test-retest consistency, the effect of stimulation duration (15, 60, 120 s), the impact of unilateral deep brain stimulation withdrawal intervals (0, 10, 30 min), and contralateral stimulation ON versus OFF. Across all experiments, patients provided over 3000 visual analogue scale ratings, which were analyzed using correlation, regression, and Bland-Altman methods, with subgroup analyses examining motor phenotype, cognition, and disease burden. Visual analogue scale ratings demonstrated strong test-retest reliability (r = 0.70, R 2 = 0.53), with 83% of repeated scores within ±2 points. Reliability was lower in patients with tremor-onset compared to non-tremor onset (P = 0.04) but was unaffected by cognitive status or quality of life. Stimulation duration influenced absolute scores, with 15 s ratings systematically lower than 60-120 s (P < 0.001), though relative scaling was preserved. Deep brain stimulation withdrawal intervals did not affect group means but increased trial-level variability, while contralateral stimulation ON versus OFF showed modest correspondence (r = 0.31, R 2 = 0.13), suggesting hemispheric interactions in subjective perception. These findings indicate that visual analogue scale ratings provide reproducible and quantifiable feedback during subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation programming. Exploratory analyses suggest that reliability may vary with motor phenotype, stimulation duration, and bilateral context. Incorporating structured visual analogue scale feedback could enhance programming workflows, support remote care models, and inform future multimodal closed-loop deep brain stimulation strategies.
000285817 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-353$$a353 - Clinical and Health Care Research (POF4-353)$$cPOF4-353$$fPOF IV$$x0
000285817 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed, , Journals: pub.dzne.de
000285817 650_7 $$2Other$$aParkinson’s disease (PD)
000285817 650_7 $$2Other$$adeep brain stimulation (DBS)
000285817 650_7 $$2Other$$avisual analogue scale (VAS)
000285817 7001_ $$00000-0002-5280-2828$$aScherer, Maximilian$$b1
000285817 7001_ $$aPeschke, Sophia$$b2
000285817 7001_ $$aKirschner, Angelina$$b3
000285817 7001_ $$aZhang, Weidong$$b4
000285817 7001_ $$aShaik, Juhi$$b5
000285817 7001_ $$aDong, Jing$$b6
000285817 7001_ $$aMehrkens, Jan-Hinnerk$$b7
000285817 7001_ $$00000-0002-7582-2215$$aKaufmann, Elisabeth$$b8
000285817 7001_ $$0P:(DE-2719)2810825$$aKoeglsperger, Thomas$$b9$$eLast author$$udzne
000285817 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)3020013-1$$a10.1093/braincomms/fcag100$$gVol. 8, no. 2, p. fcag100$$n2$$pfcag100$$tBrain communications$$v8$$x2632-1297$$y2026
000285817 8564_ $$uhttps://pub.dzne.de/record/285817/files/DZNE-2026-00353.pdf$$yRestricted
000285817 8564_ $$uhttps://pub.dzne.de/record/285817/files/DZNE-2026-00353.pdf?subformat=pdfa$$xpdfa$$yRestricted
000285817 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588)1065079516$$6P:(DE-2719)2810825$$aDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen$$b9$$kDZNE
000285817 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-353$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-350$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-300$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bGesundheit$$lNeurodegenerative Diseases$$vClinical and Health Care Research$$x0
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bBRAIN COMMUN : 2022$$d2024-12-20
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS$$d2024-12-20
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2024-12-20
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal$$d2024-04-03T10:36:45Z
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ$$d2024-04-03T10:36:45Z
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Anonymous peer review$$d2024-04-03T10:36:45Z
000285817 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNV$$2V:(DE-HGF)$$aCreative Commons Attribution CC BY (No Version)$$bDOAJ$$d2024-04-03T10:36:45Z
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List$$d2024-12-20
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0112$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bEmerging Sources Citation Index$$d2024-12-20
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection$$d2024-12-20
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9900$$2StatID$$aIF < 5$$d2024-12-20
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0561$$2StatID$$aArticle Processing Charges$$d2024-12-20
000285817 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0700$$2StatID$$aFees$$d2024-12-20
000285817 9201_ $$0I:(DE-2719)1111015$$kClinical Research (Munich)$$lClinical Research (Munich)$$x0
000285817 980__ $$ajournal
000285817 980__ $$aEDITORS
000285817 980__ $$aVDBINPRINT
000285817 980__ $$aI:(DE-2719)1111015
000285817 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED