Computerised analysis of writing and drawing by essential tremor phenotype. Issue 2 (16th December 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Peters, James; Motin, Mohammod Abdul; Perju-Dumbrava, Laura; Ali, Sheik Mohammed; Ding, Catherine; Eller, Michael; Raghav, Sanjay; Kumar, Dinesh Kant; Kempster, Peter
• Is Part Of: BMJ neurology open. Volume 3:Issue 2(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-12-16
• Subjects: tremor -- movement disorders -- clinical neurology; Neurology -- Periodicals; 616.8
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjno-2021-000212
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2632-6140

Abstract

Abstract : We investigated whether computerised analysis of writing and drawing could discriminate essential tremor (ET) phenotypes according to the 2018 Consensus Statement on the Classification of Tremors. The Consensus scheme emphasises soft additional findings, mainly motor, that do not suffice to diagnose another tremor syndrome. Ten men and nine women were classified by blinded assessors according to Consensus Axis 1 definitions of ET and ET plus. Blinded scoring of tremor severity and alternating limb movement was also conducted. Twenty healthy participants acted as controls. Four writing and three drawing tasks were performed on a Wacom Intuos Pro Large digital tablet with a pressure-sensor mounted ink pen. Sixty-seven computerised measurements were obtained, comprising static (dimensional and temporal), kinematic and pen pressure features. The mean age of ET participants was 67.2±13.0 years and mean tremor duration was 21.7±19.0 years. Six were classified as ET, five had one plus feature and eight had two plus features. The computerised analysis could predict the presence and number of ET plus features. Measures of acceleration and variation of pen pressure performed strongly to separate ET phenotypes (p<0.05). Plus features were associated with higher scores on the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor Rating Scale (p=0.001) and it appeared that ET groups were mainly being separated according to severity of tremor and by compensatory manoeuvres used by participants with more severe tremor. There were, in addition, a small number of negative kinematic correlations suggesting some slowness with ET plus. Abnormal repetitive limb movement was also correlated with tremor severity (R=0.57) by clinical grading. Critics of the Consensus Statement have drawn attention to weaknesses of the ET plus concept in relation to duration and severity of ET. This classification of ET may be too biased towards tremor severity to assist in distinguishing underlying biological differences by clinical measurement.