Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research
  • Open Access

A continuous repetitive task to detect fatigability in spinal muscular atrophy

Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases201813:160

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-018-0904-5

  • Received: 30 June 2018
  • Accepted: 29 August 2018
  • Published:

Abstract

Background

To determine the value of a continuous repetitive task to detect and quantify fatigability as additional dimension of impaired motor function in patients with hereditary proximal spinal muscular atrophy (SMA).

Results

In this repeated measure case-control study 52 patients with SMA types 2–4, 17 healthy and 29 disease controls performed five consecutive rounds of the Nine-Hole Peg test to determine the presence of fatigability. We analysed differences in test performance and associations with disease characteristics. Five patients with SMA type 2 (22%) and 1 disease control (3%) could not finish five rounds due to fatigue (p = 0.01). Patients with SMA type 2 performed the test significantly more slowly than all other groups (p < 0.005) and disease controls were slower than healthy controls (p < 0.05). Patients with SMA type 2 performed round five 27% slower than round one, while healthy controls performed round five 14% faster than round one (p = 0.005). There was no difference between SMA type 3a, type 3b/4 or disease controls and healthy controls (p > 0.4). Time needed to complete each round during the five-round task increased in 15 patients with SMA type 2 (65%), 4 with type 3a (36%), 4 with type 3b/4 (22%), 9 disease controls (31%) and 1 healthy control (6%). There was no effect of age at disease onset or disease duration in SMA type 2 (p = 0.39). Test-retest reliability was high.

Conclusion

Fatigability of remaining arm function is a feature of SMA type 2 and can be determined with continuous repetitive tasks.

Keywords

  • Neuromuscular disease
  • Spinal muscular atrophy
  • SMA
  • Clinical neurology
  • Fatigability
  • Outcome measure
  • Repeated nine-hole peg test
  • r9HPT

Background

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), caused by homozygous deletion or disabling mutations of the survival motor neuron (SMN) 1 gene, [1] is one of the most common hereditary neuromuscular diseases [2]. Deficiency of SMN protein primarily, but not exclusively, [3, 4] affects lower motor neurons leading to muscle atrophy and weakness, with considerable variability in severity between patients [5, 6]. In addition to weakness, patients with SMA often mention a lack of stamina during daily activities. Patients experience fatigability during tasks of daily life such as prolonged (power)wheelchair driving, during eating when lifting cutlery repeatedly and when chewing food. Patients also report severe limitations in daily living, including social events, work and sports due to fatigue and fatigability, with a potential negative effect on quality of life. Observations during isometric muscle contraction endurance tests [7] and the six-minute walk test (6MWT) [8, 9] suggest that abnormal muscle fatigability (i.e. a decrease in performance over a given time or sustained measure of mechanical output [10]) represents an additional dimension of attenuated motor function in SMA. Causes of fatigability in SMA may be multiple, including altered muscle metabolism [4, 11] or abnormal neuromuscular junction (NMJ) anatomy and function [1214]. With recent advances in therapy development, the need for relevant outcome measures has become more urgent [15]. Motor scales that are currently used in SMA research do not specifically measure muscle fatigability [1618] and the assessment of fatigability using other tests has been inconsistent, [8, 9, 19, 20] underlining the fact that we need additional tools to determine the presence, extent and causes of fatigability. Tests that require repetitive muscle contractions may be most sensitive for determining fatigability in conditions characterized by NMJ disorders, possibly including SMA [12]. We, therefore, investigated the repeated nine-hole peg test (r9HPT) to determine fatigability in a repeated measure case-control study design.

Methods

Participants

Patients with SMA types 2, 3 and 4 were recruited from the Dutch SMA register (www.treat-nmd.eu/patientregistries) (i.e. symptom onset at age > 6 months, < 18 months; > 18 months, < 30 years; and > 30 years, respectively and highest acquired motor milestones: the ability to sit for SMA type 2 and the ability to walk independently for SMA types 3 and 4) [6]. An additional subdivision was made: type 3a with symptom onset > 18 months, but < 3 years and type 3b with symptom onset > 3 years and < 30 years [5]. In case of discrepancy between age at symptom onset and highest acquired motor milestone, the latter was used to define SMA type. To minimize selection bias, all eligible patients enrolled in this register were offered the possibility to participate. All patients had a homozygous deletion of the SMN1 gene or a heterozygous SMN1 deletion in combination with a point mutation on the second SMN1 allele.

Disease controls were patients with other neuromuscular disorders who visited the pediatric and adult neuromuscular outpatient clinic of the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands. Healthy controls were recruited by participating SMA patients. All participants had to be over the age of 5 years. Additional exclusion criteria were a history of myasthenia gravis or other myasthenic syndromes or any other neuromuscular disorder known to affect NMJ function, or the use of pyridostigmine.

The repeated nine-hole peg test (r9HPT)

Participants were asked to perform five rounds of the Nine-Hole Peg test [2123] (r9HPT) with the Rolyan® 9HPT (Patterson Medical, Homecraft Rolyan; Sutton-in-Ashfield, United Kingdom). All patients were instructed to take 9 lightweight plastic pegs one by one from a container and place them in 9 holes on the board as fast as possible, then remove them one at a time and replace them in the container. They had to perform 5 consecutive rounds without a break, using the same, preferred hand. Participants were encouraged to complete the task as fast as possible. The time required to complete each round was recorded with a stopwatch. If participants dropped a peg, they continued with the task while we placed the peg back in the container. We also recorded all other events that might slow down test performance. The r9HPT was conducted at the outpatient clinic or at the patient’s home using a height-adjusted table and chair, with both feet positioned on the floor, or on the table attached to the patient’s wheelchair. The participant supported the test board, using the non-performing hand. The container on the board could be positioned at the side of the participant’s choice. The r9HPT was conducted twice to assess test reproducibility. If it was performed twice on the same day, there was a resting period of at least 15 min between trials.

Statistical analyses

We used a random intercept, random slope linear mixed model (LMM) to assess r9HPT performance between groups while accounting for inter-subject variance. Age and gender were added to the model as covariates. Subsequently we used the LMM to calculate the effects of age at symptom onset and disease duration on test performance in patients with SMA type 2. To evaluate incomplete test performance due to fatigue, we performed a Kaplan Meyer survival analysis, using the log-rank test to compare survival curves between groups. We evaluated incidents that might have slowed down test performance (e.g. dropping a peg). If the round time in which the incident occurred was (equal to) the slowest test measurement, the value was removed and treated as missing. We calculated the slope of the linear regression line through the five data points (i.e. seconds to perform each round) for each participant to identify participant characteristics in relation to test performance.

We assessed test reproducibility by computing two-way mixed intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), type consistency, for each round and corresponding round of the first and second r9HPT trial. p values < 0.05 were significant. We used SPSS (IBM SPSS Statistics version 20;IBM Inc., Chicago, IL) and R (R version 3.2.0 (Full of ingredients); R Foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria) for statistical analysis.

The sample size was not calculated prospectively, because of the exploratory nature of this study and unpredictable effect size. Sample size was determined by the number of eligible patients willing to participate.

Results

Patients

Ninety-eight participants performed the r9HPT, including fifty-two SMA patients (23 SMA type 2; 11 type 3a; 16 type 3b; 2 type 4), 17 healthy controls and 29 disease controls (11 Duchenne muscular dystrophy; 6 hereditary motor and sensory neuropathy (HMSN); 5 limb girdle muscular dystrophy (LGMD); 2 Becker congenital myotonia; 1 Becker muscular dystrophy; 1 Bethlem myopathy; 1 chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP); 1 progressive muscular atrophy (PMA); 1 suspected muscular dystrophy). Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1

Baseline Characteristics

 

SMA

SMA

type 2

SMA

type 3a

SMA

type 3b/4

Healthy controls

Disease controls

(N = 52)

(N = 23)

(N = 11)

(N = 18)

(N = 17)

(N = 29)

Gender, male

17 (33%)

5 (22%)

3 (27%)

9 (50%)

3 (18%)

23 (79%)

Age, y, median (range)a

 

28 (7–72)

18 (6–70)

29 (9–52)

41 (14–72)

33 (6–73)

13 (8–76)

Age symptom onset, m, median (range)

 

18 (4–456)

10 (4–30)

18 (8–24)

138 (42–456)

NA

21 (10–672)

Disease duration, y, median (range)a

 

22 (1–69)

17 (5–69)

29 (7–51)

24 (1–66)

NA

8 (1–20)

Ambulant, N (%)

 

16 (31%)

0

3 (27%)

13 (72%)

17 (100%)

23 (79%)

SMN2 copy number

3

30

21

7

2

 

4

20

1

3

16

 

U

2

1

1

No. of r9HPT completed

9

5

2

2

1

3

 

43

18

9

16

16

26

Time between 1st and 2nd r9HPT, d, median (range)

97 (0–696)

158 (0–696)

69 (0–249)

69 (0–407)

0 (0–253)

254 (0–469)

Mean speed, s/round, (range)a

 

45.6 (20–156)

22.1 (17–41)

18.8 (18–35)

16.8 (14–26)

29.2 (18–113)

Abbreviations: SMN survival motor neuron, U unknown, N number, NA not applicable, y years, m months, d days, s seconds, r9HPT repeated nine hole peg test, no. number

avalues at first performed r9HPT

Repeated nine-hole peg test

Results are summarized in Fig. 1. Six participants (2 patients with SMA type 3b, 1 healthy control and 3 disease controls) dropped a peg during one of the five rounds, which resulted in a slower time for that round. As described, these values were treated as missing in the analyses. Mean speed at which the test was performed (seconds per round (sec/round)) was 45.6 s/round (95% CI 37.5–53.7 s/round) for SMA type 2 patients, 22.1 s/round (95% CI 10.4–33.7 s/round) for SMA type 3a patients, 18.8 s/round (95% CI 9.6–28.0 s/round) for SMA type 3b/4 patients, 29.2 s/round (95% CI 21.7–35.6 s/round) for disease controls and 16.8 s/round (95% CI 7.4–26.2 s/round) for healthy controls. Mean speed was significantly slower in SMA type 2 patients (p < 0.001) and disease controls than in healthy controls (p < 0.05). There was no difference in mean speed between healthy controls and SMA type 3a patients (p = 0.3) or SMA type 3b/4 patients (p = 0.6). Compared to disease controls, SMA type 2 patients were significantly slower (p < 0.005) (Fig. 2). When looking at the interaction effect of participant groups and round number to evaluate test performance during 5 subsequent rounds, there was a significant difference between patients with SMA type 2 and healthy controls (p = 0.005), but not between other patient groups (SMA type 3a, SMA type 3b/4, disease controls) and healthy controls (p > 0.4): SMA type 2 patients performed round five (51.3 s, 95% CI: 40.3–62.2 s) 27.4% slower than round one (40.2 s, 95% CI: 34.6–45.8 s), SMA type 3a patients performed round five (21.7 s, 95% CI: 6–37.5 s) 2.8% faster than round one (22.4 s, 95% CI: 14.4–30.3 s), SMA type 3b/4 patients performed round five (17.7 s, 95% CI: 5.3–30.1 s) 11.6% faster than round one (19.8 s, 95% CI: 13.4–26.2 s), disease controls performed round five (29.9 s, 20.0–39.8 s) 5.2% slower than round one (28.4 s, 95% CI: 23.2–33.7 s) and healthy controls performed round five (15.7 s, 95% CI: 3.0–28.4 s) 13.5% faster than round one (17.9 s, 95% CI: 11.3–24.4 s) (Fig. 2). Neither age at disease onset nor disease duration influenced test performance in patients with SMA type 2 (p = 0.4 and p = 0.7). Based on the slope of their individual linear regression lines, the time needed to complete each round during the five-round task increased in 15 patients with SMA type 2 (65%), 4 patients with SMA type 3a (36%), 4 patients with SMA type 3b/4 (22%), 9 disease controls (31%) and 1 healthy control (6%). Characteristics of these participants are summarized in Table 2, sorted by the magnitude of the slope during five rounds. These include five patients with SMA type 2 (22%) and one disease control (3%) who could not complete the test due to fatigue (p = 0.01) (Fig. 3).
Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Results of the repeated 9HPT in patients with SMA and (disease) controls. The time needed to complete the first round was set as 100%; subsequent rounds are expressed as percentages compared to baseline

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Mean repeated 9HPT results for each participant group. Mean time needed (seconds) to complete each round for each participant group and 95% confidence intervals

Table 2

Characteristics of participants with increased time needed to complete one round during the 5-round task

Gender

Age (y)

Disease

Disease duration (y)

ambulation

Slopea

Male

16.92

Duchenne

15.42

non-ambulant

34.5

Female

30.25

SMA type 2

29.50

non-ambulant

21.8

Male

23.75

SMA type 2

22.83

non-ambulant

21.6

Male

7.68

SMA type 2

7.39

non-ambulant

9.9

Female

7.69

SMA type 2

7.19

non-ambulant

6.0

Male

13.49

SMA type 2

12.66

non-ambulant

5.0

Female

70.28

SMA type 2

69.37

non-ambulant

3.2

Female

21.40

SMA type 2

21.06

non-ambulant

2.2

Male

9.54

SMA type 2

8.74

non-ambulant

1.6

Male

48.59

SMA type 3b/4

44.09

non-ambulant

1.5

Female

25.94

SMA type 2

25.52

non-ambulant

1.4

Female

38.77

SMA type 3a

37.61

non-ambulant

1.4

Female

24.41

SMA type 2

22.91

non-ambulant

1.2

Female

5.69

SMA type 2

4.61

non-ambulant

1.1

Male

75.70

PMA

19.70

ambulant

0.8

Male

9.56

Becker myotonia

8.14

ambulant

0.7

Female

37.98

SMA type 2

37.44

non-ambulant

0.6

Female

9.95

SMA type 3a

8.29

non-ambulant

0.6

Female

5.69

SMA type 2

4.69

non-ambulant

0.5

Female

29.51

Healthy control

na

ambulant

0.5

Male

38.00

SMA type 3b/4

13.50

ambulant

0.4

Male

13.33

Duchenne

u

non-ambulant

0.4

Female

13.64

SMA type 2

12.93

non-ambulant

0.4

Male

8.92

SMA type 3a

7.33

ambulant

0.2

Male

21.98

SMA type 3b/4

u

ambulant

0.2

Female

12.08

SMA type 2

11.33

non-ambulant

0.2

Female

21.83

SMA type 3a

20.42

non-ambulant

0.2

Female

7.73

HMSN

6.40

ambulant

0.2

Male

13.34

Duchenne

11.84

non-ambulant

0.1

Male

34.86

SMA type 3b/4

31.36

ambulant

0.1

Male

8.41

Duchenne

u

ambulant

0.1

Male

14.62

Duchenne

u

ambulant

0.1

Female

15.25

HMSN

13.92

ambulant

0.1

Abbreviations: SMA spinal muscular atrophy, HMSN hereditary motor and sensory neuropathy, PMA progressive muscular atrophy, y years, u unknown, na not applicable

aSlope: seconds increase per round

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Participants with uncompleted repeated 9HPT due to exhaustion. Kaplan Meyer curves depicting round numbers at which subjects had to stop due to exhaustion

ICCs showed a high degree of test-retest reliability. The single measure ICCs for rounds 1–5 were (95%CI) 0.91 (0.86–0.94); 0.71 (0.58–0.73); 0.79 (0.68–0.86); 0.82 (0.72–0.88) and 0.88 (0.81–0.92), respectively.

Discussion

Fatigability during activities of daily life may further incapacitate SMA patients who already experience disability due to muscle weakness. Time needed to complete rounds 2–5 of the r9HPT increased each round in patients with SMA type 2, indicating a reduced capacity to sustain a simple activity that mimics hand function in daily life.

Fatigability was previously suggested in ambulant SMA patients in a study that compared results of the first and sixth minute of the six-minute walk test (6MWT) [8, 9]. Additionally, the presence of fatigability in the upper limbs was implicated by an abnormal decremental response to repetitive nerve stimulation in 49% of patients with SMA types 2 and 3 [12]. Assessment of maximal isometric muscle contraction of both upper and lower limbs has failed to detect fatigability in SMA [20]. However, repetitive muscle contraction may be more sensitive than sustained isometric muscle contraction in assessing fatigability in disorders characterized by neuromuscular junction dysfunction, [24] including patients with SMA types 2 and 3 [12]. In this study we were able to document fatigability in the upper limbs, utilizing this concept, with a simple clinical test. The nine-hole peg test, originally designed to assess finger dexterity, [2123] is cheap and we could reproduce the previously reported high test-retest reliability [25] in patients with SMA. Furthermore, severely affected SMA patients with minimal arm function can lift the lightweight pegs, but a possible disadvantage of the r9HPT is the clear ceiling effect that would limit its use to patients with SMA type 2, as reflected by the fact that most patients with SMA types 3 and 4 performed subsequent rounds at a similar or higher speed (Fig. 2), with group results that were comparable to healthy controls. Nevertheless, even ambulant patients with SMA type 3 often mention fatigability in connection with activities such as walking up/down stairs, and the results of this study provide proof of concept for the development of additional repetitive tests that could be tailored to the individual’s remaining motor function. The r9HPT could be improved by individually standardized test speed and although we do not consider it likely that fatigability in SMA type 2 is the result of a lack of motivation, since all patients visibly performed to the maximum of their abilities, we think that future studies should include questionnaires to determine motivation and pain during tests. Monitoring of heart rate and muscle recruitment by means of surface electromyography would be additional improvements to the current study protocol. Moreover, it is likely that slight modification of other existing tests that mimic arm and hand function in daily life activities, such as the Functional dexterity test [26] or the Box and Block test, [27] or of selected items of the Jebsen-Taylor hand function test, [28, 29] Motor Function Measure (MFM) [18] and Upper Limb Module [30] would be sufficient to yield a series of repeated-measure tests. Outcome measures for upper limb function that already employ repetitive flexion/extension movements of wrist and fingers (MoviPlate) and that have been validated in patients with Duchenne and used preliminary in SMA patients, [31, 32] could probably be adapted even more easily to measure fatigability.

Muscle weakness may play an important role in fatigue and fatigability. A previous study showed physiological fatigability in both healthy controls and patients with neuromuscular disorders during sustained maximal voluntary muscle contraction, [33] which indicates that fatigability is not only secondary to weakness. Since we did not document muscle strength of disease controls, we cannot exclude baseline differences between disease controls and patients with SMA type 2. There was, however, no effect of age at disease onset and disease duration, both surrogate markers for disease severity, on test performance in SMA type 2 patients. Moreover, we did not observe slowing of 9HPT performance in the majority of patients with SMA type 3a, despite the fact that many had significantly reduced muscle strength. These observations imply that fatigability in SMA type 2 is, at least partially, a separate dimension next to muscle weakness in SMA.

Conclusion

We show that a simple continuous repetitive hand task provokes fatigability in patients with SMA type 2. Our results indicate that fatigability may represent an important dimension of reduced motor function, in addition to weakness, and that outcome measures of repetitive tasks could be used to document its presence. Developing tailored measures to quantify fatigability, implementable in clinical trials, could be an important step towards the development of (add-on) medication to treat fatigability in SMA, improving quality of life. Simple tests of repetitive muscle contractions that mimic important functions of daily life are a promising addition to existing outcome measures.

Abbreviations

6MWT: 

Six-Minute Walk Test

CIDP: 

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy

HMSN: 

Hereditary motor and sensory neuropathy

ICC: 

Intra-class correlation coefficients

LGMD: 

Limb girdle muscular dystrophy

LMM: 

Linear mixed model

MFM: 

Motor function measure

NMJ: 

Neuromuscular junction

PMA: 

Progressive muscular atrophy

r9HPT: 

Repeated Nine-Hole Peg Test

SMA: 

Spinal muscular atrophy

SMN: 

Survival motor neuron

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all patients and healthy controls who participated in this study.

Funding

This study was supported by grants from the Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds (WAR08–24, WAR13–07 and WAR14–26) and Stichting Spieren voor Spieren. Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds and Stichting Spieren voor Spieren had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis or interpretation, writing the report or decisions concerning submitting this paper.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Authors’ contributions

Study concept and design were conducted by MS, RIW, BB and WLP. Critical revision of concept and design and important intellectual input in the design was done by MS, RIW, BB, CAW, LHB and WLP. Data was acquired by MS, RIW and ML. Analysis and interpretation of data was done by MS, RIW, BB, HJW and WLP. Drafting of the manuscript was done by MS and WLP and the manuscript was critically revised for important intellectual content by: MS, RIW, BB, ML, HJW, CAW, LHB and WLP. Study supervision was done by WLP. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study protocol was approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee (MERC) of the University Medical Center Utrecht. All participants and parents of participants younger than 18 years gave written informed consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

MS, RIW, ML, HJW and CAW declare that they have no competing interests. BB serves on scientific advisory board for Roche Hoffman-La Roche Ltd., Zurich LHB serves on scientific advisory boards for the Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, Thierry Latran Foundation, Biogen Idec and Cytokinetics; received an educational grant from Baxter International Inc.; serves on the editorial board of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry; and receives research support from the Prinses Beatrix Fonds, Netherlands ALS Foundation, The European Community’s Health Seventh Framework Programme (grant agreement n° 259,867), The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (Vici Scheme, JPND (SOPHIA, STRENGTH)).WLP serves on scientific advisory boards of Biogen and Avexis and the LMI070 data monitoring committee of Novartis and receives research support from the Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, Netherlands ALS Foundation and Stichting Spieren voor Spieren.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Neurology, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, Utrecht University, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, F02.230, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
(2)
Child Development and Exercise Center, Wilhelmina Children’s Hospital, Utrecht University, University Medical Center Utrecht, Lundlaan 6, 3584 EA Utrecht, The Netherlands

References

  1. Lefebvre S, Burglen L, Reboullet S, Clermont O, Burlet P, Viollet L, et al. Identification and characterization of a spinal muscular atrophy-determining gene. Cell. 1995;80:155–65.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Sugarman EA, Nagan N, Zhu H, Akmaev VR, Zhou Z, Rohlfs EM, et al. Pan-ethnic carrier screening and prenatal diagnosis for spinal muscular atrophy: clinical laboratory analysis of >72,400 specimens. Eur J Hum Genet. 2012;20(1):27–32.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Hamilton G, Gillingwater TH. Spinal muscular atrophy: going beyond the motor neuron. Trends Mol Med. 2013;19:40–50.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Shababi M, Lorson CL, Rudnik-Schoneborn SS. Spinal muscular atrophy: a motor neuron disorder or a multi-organ disease? J Anat. 2014;224:15–28.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Zerres K, Rudnik-Schoneborn S. Natural history in proximal spinal muscular atrophy. Clinical analysis of 445 patients and suggestions for a modification of existing classifications. Arch Neurol. 1995;52:518–23.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Munsat TL, Davies KE. International SMA consortium meeting. (26-28 June 1992, Bonn, Germany). Neuromuscul Disord. 1992;2:423–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Granger MW, Buschang PH, Throckmorton GS, Iannaccone ST. Masticatory muscle function in patients with spinal muscular atrophy. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1999;115(6):697–702.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Montes J, McDermott MP, Martens WB, Dunaway S, Glanzman AM, Riley S, et al. Six-minute walk test demonstrates motor fatigue in spinal muscular atrophy. Neurology. 2010;74:833–8.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Montes J, Blumenschine M, Dunaway S, Alter AS, Engelstad K, Rao AK, et al. Weakness and fatigue in diverse neuromuscular diseases. J Child Neurol. 2013;28:1277–83.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Kluger BM, Krupp LB, Enoka RM. Fatigue and fatigability in neurologic illnesses: proposal for a unified taxonomy. Neurology. 2013;80:409–16.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Ripolone M, Ronchi D, Violano R, Vallejo D, Fagiolari G, Barca E, et al. Impaired muscle mitochondrial biogenesis and Myogenesis in spinal muscular atrophy. JAMA Neurol. 2015;72:666–75.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Wadman RI, Vrancken AF, van den Berg LH, van der Pol WL. Dysfunction of the neuromuscular junction in spinal muscular atrophy types 2 and 3. Neurology. 2012;79:2050–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Kariya S, Park GH, Maeno-Hikichi Y, Leykekhman O, Lutz C, Arkovitz MS, et al. Reduced SMN protein impairs maturation of the neuromuscular junctions in mouse models of spinal muscular atrophy. Hum Mol Genet. 2008;17:2552–69.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Martínez-Hernández R, Bernal S, Also-Rallo E, Alias L, Barcelo MJ, Hereu M, et al. Synaptic defects in type I spinal muscular atrophy in human development. J Pathol. 2013;229:49–61.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Bertini E, Burghes A, Bushby K, Estournet-Mathiaud B, Finkel RS, Hughes RA, et al. 134th ENMC international workshop: outcome measures and treatment of spinal muscular atrophy, 11-13 February 2005, Naarden, the Netherlands. Neuromuscul Disord. 2005;15:802–16.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Cano SJ, Mayhew A, Glanzman AM, Krosschell KJ, Swoboda KJ, Main M, et al. Rasch analysis of clinical outcome measures in spinal muscular atrophy. Muscle Nerve. 2014;49:422–30.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Glanzman AM, O’Hagen JM, McDermott MP, Martens WB, Flickinger J, Riley S, et al. Validation of the expanded Hammersmith functional motor scale in spinal muscular atrophy type II and III. J Child Neurol. 2011;26:1499–507.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Bérard C, Payan C, Hodgkinson I, Fermanian J. A motor function measure scale for neuromuscular diseases; construction and validation study. Neuromuscul Disord. 2005;15:463–70.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Mazzone E, Bianco F, Main M, van den Hauwe M, Ash M, de Vries R, et al. Six minute walk test in type III spinal muscular atrophy: a 12month longitudinal study. Neuromuscul Disord. 2013;23:624–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Iannaccone ST, White M, Browne R, Russman B, Buncher R, Samaha FJ. Muscle fatigue in spinal muscular atrophy. J Child Neurol. 1997;12:321–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Mathiowetz V, Weber K, Kashman N, Volland G. Adult norms for the nine hole peg test of finger dexterity. Occup Ther J Res. 1985;5:24–38.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Poole JL, Burtner PA, Torres TA, McMullen CK, Markham A, Marcum ML, et al. Measuring dexterity in children using the nine-hole peg test. J Hand Ther. 2005;18:348–51.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Oxford Grice K, Vogel KA, Le V, Mitchell A, Muniz S, Vollmer MA. Adult norms for a commercially available nine hole peg test for finger dexterity. Am J Occup Ther. 2003;57:570–3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Symonette CJ, Watson BV, Koopman WJ, Nicolle MW, Doherty TJ. Muscle strength and fatigue in patients with generalized myasthenia gravis. Muscle Nerve. 2010;41:362–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Smith YA, Hong E, Presson C. Normative and validation studies of the nine-hole peg test with children. Percept Mot Skills. 2000;90:823–43.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Aaron DH, Jansen CW. Development of the functional dexterity test (FDT): construction, validity, reliability, and normative data. J Hand Ther. 2003;16:12–21.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Mathiowetz V, Volland G, Kashman N, Weber K. Adult norms for the box and block test of manual dexterity. Am J Occup Ther. 1985;39:386–91.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Yancosek KE, Howell D. A narrative review of dexterity assessments. J Hand Ther. 2009;22:258–69.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Jebsen RH, Taylor N, Trieschmann RB, Trotter MJ, Howard LA. An objective and standardized test of hand function. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1969;50:311–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Mazzone E, Bianco F, Martinelli D, Glanzman AM, Messina S, De Sanctis R, et al. Assessing upper limb function in nonambulant SMA patients: development of a new module. Neuromuscul Disord. 2011;21:406–12.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Servais L, Deconinck N, Moraux A, Benali M, Canal A, Van Parys F, et al. Innovative methods to assess upper limb strength and function in non-ambulant Duchenne patients. Neuromuscul Disord. 2013;23:139–48.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Seferian AM, Moraux A, Canal A, Decostre V, Diebate O, Le Moing AG, et al. Upper limb evaluation and one-year follow up of non-ambulant patients with spinal muscular atrophy: an observational multicenter trial. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0121799.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Schillings ML, Kalkman JS, Janssen HMHA, van Engelen BG, Bleijenberg G, Zwarts MJ. Experienced and physiological fatigue in neuromuscular disorders. Clin Neurophysiol. 2007;118:292–300.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

Advertisement