Finger-to-Nose Test Findings in Alzheimer's Disease

The finger-to-nose test improved diagnosis of cerebrovascular events in patients presenting with isolated dizziness in the emergency department

It is difficult to identify patients with isolated dizziness caused by cerebrovascular events. The estimated risk of cerebrovascular events in isolated dizziness patients is not completely understood. We aimed to evaluate the association of the finger-to-nose test (FNT) in diagnosing cerebrovascular events in isolated dizziness patients in emergency departments (EDs). We combined 2 datasets from a single center for consecutive isolated dizziness patients, with the same inclusion and exclusion criteria. Those who met any of the following criteria were excluded: no FNT data, age < 16 years, and psychological trauma. The primary outcome was cerebrovascular event, which was defined as cerebral stroke due to cerebral infarction, cerebral hemorrhage, vertebral artery dissection, or transient ischemic attack. In the combined dataset, there were 357 patients complaining of isolated dizziness and 31 cerebrovascular events. After adjusted by 5 previously reported risk factors for cerebrovascular event, (age, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, nystagmus), a multivariable logistic model analysis showed that the existence of FNT abnormalities was significantly associated with cerebrovascular events (odds ratio, 25.3; 95% confidence interval, 7.3-88.2; p < 0.001). There was a significant increase in predictive accuracy, with an AUC increase of 0.116 in the in a ROC analysis (p = 0.023). The existence of FNT abnormalities is considered as a strong risk factor that could be useful for predicting cerebrovascular events in isolated dizziness patients. We recommend the FNT for screening isolated dizziness patients in EDs to judge whether they need to undergo further diagnostic evaluation.

Portable Sensors Add Reliable Kinematic Measures to the Assessment of Upper Extremity Function

Ordinal scales with low resolution are used to assess arm function in clinic. These scales may be improved by adding objective kinematic measures. The aim was to analyze within-subject, inter-rater and overall reliability (i.e., including within-subject and inter-rater reliability) and check the system’s validity of kinematic measures from inertial sensors for two such protocols on one person. Twenty healthy volunteers repeatedly performed two tasks, finger-to-nose and drinking, during two test sessions with two different raters. Five inertial sensors, on the forearms, upper arms and xiphoid process were used. Comparisons against an optical camera system evaluated the measurement validity. Cycle time, range of motion (ROM) in shoulder and elbow were calculated. Bland–Altman plots and linear mixed models including the generalizability (G) coefficient evaluated the reliability of the measures. Within-subject reliability was good to excellent in both tests (G = 0.80–0.97) and may serve as a baseline when assessing upper extremities in future patient groups. Overall reliability was acceptable to excellent (G = 0.77–0.94) for all parameters except elbow axial rotation in finger-to-nose task and both elbow axial rotation and flexion/extension in drinking task, mainly due to poor inter-rater reliability in these parameters. The low to good reliability for elbow ROM probably relates to high within-subject variability. The sensors provided good to excellent measures of cycle time and shoulder ROM in non-disabled individuals and thus have the potential to improve today’s assessment of arm function.