Abstract
Background and Objectives People with Parkinson’s disease (PWP) face significant gaps in care. Limited neurologist access, infrequent clinic visits, and inadequate symptom measurement culminate in suboptimal therapy and high morbidity. Quantitative Digitography (QDG) addresses these care gaps by providing validated, quantitative metrics of all motor signs in Parkinson’s disease (PD) in real-time through a 30-second repetitive alternating finger tapping (RAFT) task. We investigated the feasibility and clinical relevance of remote QDG monitoring in individuals with movement disorders.
Methods In this prospective cohort study, participants with suspected or clinically established PD were referred by neurologists from Stanford Movement Disorders Clinic, with one participant recruited outside Stanford. Participants were asked to complete at-home QDG-RAFT for 30 days and were administered usability and quality-of-life questionnaires throughout testing; descriptive statistics summarized compliance and questionnaire responses, and a Spearman correlation assessed the relationship between QDG Mobility Score and MDS-UPDRS Part II scores. The primary outcome was compliance with once-daily testing for at least 16/30 days of remote monitoring.
Results 30 participants (24 with clinically diagnosed and 6 with suspected PD at time of referral) were included. 100% of participants demonstrated compliance with once-daily testing for at least 16/30 days. Adherence rates for once-daily and twice-daily testing were 96.2% and 82.2%, respectively, with 96% of participants rating once-daily testing as easy. The QDG Mobility Score correlated strongly with patients’ self-reported impact of motor symptoms on Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) per the MDS-UPDRS II (ρ=-0.61 [−0.88, −0.16], p=0.004). QDG-RAFT documented motor asymmetry and impairment from 1-month pre-diagnosis to 20-years duration of PD. The QDG Mobility Score reflected motor improvement and deterioration after adding or removing respectively a single tablet of carbidopa/levodopa.
Discussion Participants showed excellent compliance with remote QDG monitoring and found the system easy to use. The QDG Mobility Score was highly correlated with ADLs, captured motor complexities across a broad disease duration range, and detected responses to minor therapy adjustments. A pivotal advancement in PD care, QDG offers providers an accessible, comprehensive tool to remotely monitor motor symptoms, optimize treatment regimens, and bridge care gaps created by infrequent clinic visits and subjective symptom assessment.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by Stanford Medicine Catalyst, Wu Tsai Neurosciences Institute at Stanford University, and the Debbie and Andy Rachleff Foundation.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the Stanford University Institutional Review Board (IRB) in accordance with recognized ethical guidelines (IRB eProtocol #60883). All participants provided written informed consent prior to enrollment in the study. The study was not registered as a clinical trial, as it does not involve the testing of a health-related intervention within the scope of a regulated trial registry.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
