Determinants of tapping speed in normal control subjects and subjects withParkinson's disease: Differing effects of brief and continued practice

Citation
Jg. Nutt et al., Determinants of tapping speed in normal control subjects and subjects withParkinson's disease: Differing effects of brief and continued practice, MOVEMENT D, 15(5), 2000, pp. 843-849
Citations number
17
Categorie Soggetti
Neurology,"Neurosciences & Behavoir
Journal title
MOVEMENT DISORDERS
ISSN journal
08853185 → ACNP
Volume
15
Issue
5
Year of publication
2000
Pages
843 - 849
Database
ISI
SICI code
0885-3185(200009)15:5<843:DOTSIN>2.0.ZU;2-#
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alternate tapping speed is widely used as a measure of bradykin esia in Parkinson's disease (PD). Tapping speed in normal control subjects and factors that might influence tapping speed have not been systematically examined. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of age, hand dominance, and gender on tap ping speed in normal control subjects and to compare the effects of practic e on tapping speed in normal and PD control subjects. METHODS: Tapping speed for three sequential trials in the dominant and nond ominant hand was examined in 100 normal control subjects and 60 subjects wi th PD. The effect of hourly practice over 26 hours (19 trials) was investig ated in 14 normal and 24 PD subjects. RESULTS: The speed with which normal subjects alternately tapped two counte rs was negatively correlated with age, was greater in the dominant hand, wa s not related to gender, and improved with short-term practice (three trial s) and with continued practice over 26 hours. Parkinsonian subjects, in gen eral, tapped more slowly than normal control subjects and more slowly in th e more affected arm. Parkinsonian subjects benefited from short-term practi ce as much as normal control subjects but, unlike normal control subjects, did not improve with continued practice over 26 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Alternate tapping speed is influenced by age, hand dominance, Parkinson's disease, and practice. Subjects with PD do not benefit as much from continued practice as do normal subjects, suggesting some limitation o r impairment of procedural (motor) learning in PD.