Person:

Narayanaswami, Pushpa

Muscular dystrophy encompasses a diverse group of genetically determined muscle disorders. The first clinical description of the disorder is attributed to Giovanni Semmola, who, in 1829, described 2 boys affected by a disorder with prominent muscular hypertrophy.1 Between 1850 and 1868, Aran, Meryon, and Duchenne described a progressive atrophy of voluntary muscles, ultimately termed pseudohypertrophic muscular paralysis of children by Duchenne.1,2 Other descriptions followed: familial atrophy of the pelvic girdle muscles (Leyden in 1876), scapulohumeral muscular atrophy (Erb in 1884), and myopathy with facial weakness (Landouzy and Dejerine in 1884).1 The term limb-girdle muscular dystrophy (LGMD), suggested by Stevenson in 1953,3 and further detailed by Walton and Nattrass in a seminal article,2 refers to a group of muscular dystrophies with onset of weakness in the shoulder or pelvic girdles.4 The variable clinical course of this disorder was recognized even in these early descriptions.2,3

Background: Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are statements that provide recommendations to optimize patient care for a specific clinical problem or question. Merely reading a guideline rarely leads to implementation of recommendations. The American Academy of Neurology (AAN) has a formal process of guideline development and dissemination. The last few years have seen a burgeoning of social media such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, and newer methods of dissemination such as podcasts and webinars. The role of these media in guideline dissemination has not been studied. Systematic evaluation of dissemination methods and comparison of the effectiveness of newer methods with traditional methods is not available. It is also not known whether specific dissemination methods may be more effectively targeted to specific audiences. Objective: Our aim was to (1) develop an innovative dissemination strategy by adding social media-based dissemination methods to traditional methods for the AAN clinical practice guidelines “Complementary and alternative medicine in multiple sclerosis” (“CAM in MS”) and (2) evaluate whether the addition of social media outreach improves awareness of the CPG and knowledge of CPG recommendations, and affects implementation of those recommendations. Methods: Outcomes were measured by four surveys in each of the two target populations: patients and physicians/clinicians (“physicians”). The primary outcome was the difference in participants’ intent to discuss use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) with their physicians or patients, respectively, after novel dissemination, as compared with that after traditional dissemination. Secondary outcomes were changes in awareness of the CPG, knowledge of CPG content, and behavior regarding CAM use in multiple sclerosis (MS). Results: Response rates were 25.08% (622/2480) for physicians and 43.5% (348/800) for patients. Awareness of the CPG increased after traditional dissemination (absolute difference, 95% confidence interval: physicians 36%, 95% CI 25-46, and patients 10%, 95% CI 1-11) but did not increase further after novel dissemination (physicians 0%, 95% CI -11 to 11, and patients -4%, 95% CI -6 to 14). Intent to discuss CAM also increased after traditional dissemination but did not change after novel dissemination (traditional: physicians 12%, 95% CI 2-22, and patients 19%, 95% CI 3-33; novel: physicians 11%, 95% CI -1 to -21, and patients -8%, 95% CI -22 to 8). Knowledge of CPG recommendations and behavior regarding CAM use in MS did not change after either traditional dissemination or novel dissemination. Conclusions: Social media-based dissemination methods did not confer additional benefit over print-, email-, and Internet-based methods in increasing CPG awareness and changing intent in physicians or patients. Research on audience selection, message formatting, and message delivery is required to utilize Web 2.0 technologies optimally for dissemination.

This report considers the recommendations of the State Society Task Force (SSTF), which evaluated how the relationship between the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and neurologic societies of individual states can foster the care of patients with neurologic diseases. The task force also evaluated the role of state neurosociety and state medical society interactions in supporting the profession of neurology. The SSTF recommended that the AAN expand current support services to state neurosocieties and foster additional neurosociety development. Specific services to be considered by the AAN include online combined AAN/state neurosociety dues payment and enhanced Web support. The role of the AAN as a liaison between state neurosocieties and state medical societies is important to facilitate state level advocacy for neurology.

Objectives: (1) To assess the diagnostic accuracy of EMG in radiculopathy. (2) To evaluate the intrarater reliability and interrater reliability of EMG in radiculopathy. (3) To assess the presence of confirmation bias in EMG. Methods: Three experienced academic electromyographers interpreted 3 compact discs with 20 EMG videos (10 normal, 10 radiculopathy) in a blinded, standardized fashion without information regarding the nature of the study. The EMGs were interpreted 3 times (discs A, B, C) 1 month apart. Clinical information was provided only with disc C. Intrarater reliability was calculated by comparing interpretations in discs A and B, interrater reliability by comparing interpretation between reviewers. Confirmation bias was estimated by the difference in correct interpretations when clinical information was provided. Results: Sensitivity was similar to previous reports (77%, confidence interval [CI] 63%–90%); specificity was 71%, CI 56%–85%. Intrarater reliability was good (κ 0.61, 95% CI 0.41–0.81); interrater reliability was lower (κ 0.53, CI 0.35–0.71). There was no substantial confirmation bias when clinical information was provided (absolute difference in correct responses 2.2%, CI −13.3% to 17.7%); the study lacked precision to exclude moderate confirmation bias. Conclusions: This study supports that (1) serial EMG studies should be performed by the same electromyographer since intrarater reliability is better than interrater reliability; (2) knowledge of clinical information does not bias EMG interpretation substantially; (3) EMG has moderate diagnostic accuracy for radiculopathy with modest specificity and electromyographers should exercise caution interpreting mild abnormalities. Classification of evidence: This study provides Class III evidence that EMG has moderate diagnostic accuracy and specificity for radiculopathy.

I open my e-mails, only to see yet another admonishment from the hospital administration. I have not checked enough boxes on the electronic health record, and therefore have not met criteria for meaningful use. I wonder: is this what taking care of my patients boils down to?

Objective: To make evidence-based recommendations for screening, diagnosing, and treating psychiatric disorders in individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS).

Methods: We reviewed the literature (1950 to August 2011) and evaluated the available evidence.

Results and recommendations: Clinicians may consider using the Center for Neurologic Study Emotional Lability Scale to screen for pseudobulbar affect (Level C). Clinicians may consider the Beck Depression Inventory and a 2-question tool to screen for depressive disorders and the General Health Questionnaire to screen for broadly defined emotional disturbances (Level C). Evidence is insufficient to support/refute the use of other screening tools, the possibility that somatic/neurovegetative symptoms affect these tools' accuracy, or the use of diagnostic instruments or clinical evaluation procedures for identifying psychiatric disorders in MS (Level U). Clinicians may consider a telephone-administered cognitive behavioral therapy program for treating depressive symptoms (Level C). Although pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies are widely used to treat depressive and anxiety disorders in individuals with MS, evidence is insufficient to support/refute the use of the antidepressants and individual and group therapies reviewed herein (Level U). For pseudobulbar affect, a combination of dextromethorphan and quinidine may be considered (Level C). Evidence is insufficient to determine the psychiatric effects in individuals with MS of disease-modifying and symptomatic therapies and corticosteroids; risk factors for suicide; and treatment of psychotic disorders (Level U). Research is needed on the effectiveness in individuals with MS of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments frequently used in the non-MS population.

Objective: To develop evidence-based recommendations for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in multiple sclerosis (MS).

Methods: We searched the literature (1970–March 2011; March 2011−September 2013 MEDLINE search), classified articles, and linked recommendations to evidence.

Results and recommendations: Clinicians might offer oral cannabis extract for spasticity symptoms and pain (excluding central neuropathic pain) (Level A). Clinicians might offer tetrahydrocannabinol for spasticity symptoms and pain (excluding central neuropathic pain) (Level B). Clinicians should counsel patients that these agents are probably ineffective for objective spasticity (short-term)/tremor (Level B) and possibly effective for spasticity and pain (long-term) (Level C). Clinicians might offer Sativex oromucosal cannabinoid spray (nabiximols) for spasticity symptoms, pain, and urinary frequency (Level B). Clinicians should counsel patients that these agents are probably ineffective for objective spasticity/urinary incontinence (Level B). Clinicians might choose not to offer these agents for tremor (Level C). Clinicians might counsel patients that magnetic therapy is probably effective for fatigue and probably ineffective for depression (Level B); fish oil is probably ineffective for relapses, disability, fatigue, MRI lesions, and quality of life (QOL) (Level B); ginkgo biloba is ineffective for cognition (Level A) and possibly effective for fatigue (Level C); reflexology is possibly effective for paresthesia (Level C); Cari Loder regimen is possibly ineffective for disability, symptoms, depression, and fatigue (Level C); and bee sting therapy is possibly ineffective for relapses, disability, fatigue, lesion burden/volume, and health-related QOL (Level C). Cannabinoids may cause adverse effects. Clinicians should exercise caution regarding standardized vs nonstandardized cannabis extracts and overall CAM quality control/nonregulation. Safety/efficacy of other CAM/CAM interaction with MS disease-modifying therapies is unknown.

Objective: To review the current evidence and make practice recommendations regarding the diagnosis and treatment of limb-girdle muscular dystrophies (LGMDs).

Methods: Systematic review and practice recommendation development using the American Academy of Neurology guideline development process.

Results: Most LGMDs are rare, with estimated prevalences ranging from 0.07 per 100,000 to 0.43 per 100,000. The frequency of some muscular dystrophies varies based on the ethnic background of the population studied. Some LGMD subtypes have distinguishing features, including pattern of muscle involvement, cardiac abnormalities, extramuscular involvement, and muscle biopsy findings. The few published therapeutic trials were not designed to establish clinical efficacy of any treatment.

Principal recommendations: For patients with suspected muscular dystrophy, clinicians should use a clinical approach to guide genetic diagnosis based on clinical phenotype, inheritance pattern, and associated manifestations (Level B). Clinicians should refer newly diagnosed patients with an LGMD subtype and high risk of cardiac complications for cardiology evaluation even if they are asymptomatic from a cardiac standpoint (Level B). In patients with LGMD with a known high risk of respiratory failure, clinicians should obtain periodic pulmonary function testing (Level B). Clinicians should refer patients with muscular dystrophy to a clinic that has access to multiple specialties designed specifically to care for patients with neuromuscular disorders (Level B). Clinicians should not offer patients with LGMD gene therapy, myoblast transplantation, neutralizing antibody to myostatin, or growth hormone outside of a research study designed to determine efficacy and safety of the treatment (Level R). Detailed results and recommendations are available on the Neurology® Web site at Neurology.org.

The muscular dystrophies (MDs) are a heterogeneous group of genetically determined myopathies. Identification of underlying genetic defects has demonstrated that MDs exhibit significant phenotypic and genetic heterogeneity. One genetic mutation can lead to a variety of phenotypes while different genetic mutations can manifest similar phenotypes; therefore MDs are challenging to diagnose.

A major goal of health care reform in the United States is to replace the traditional fee-for-service model with a value-based system, which incentivizes high-quality care. Quality measurement is an integral and necessary part of this process.1,2 While standardizing care of MDs can be challenging because of their heterogeneity, common themes of management, such as the maintenance of nutrition, sustaining mobility, and management of complications, are applicable to many MDs. We report a quality measurement set for the management of MDs.

Objective: To systematically review the evidence regarding rehabilitation treatments in multiple sclerosis (MS).

Methods: We systematically searched the literature (1970–2013) and classified articles using 2004 American Academy of Neurology criteria.

Results: This systematic review highlights the paucity of well-designed studies, which are needed to evaluate the available MS rehabilitative therapies. Weekly home/outpatient physical therapy (8 weeks) probably is effective for improving balance, disability, and gait (MS type unspecified, participants able to walk ≥5 meters) but probably is ineffective for improving upper extremity dexterity (1 Class I). Inpatient exercises (3 weeks) followed by home exercises (15 weeks) possibly are effective for improving disability (relapsing-remitting MS [RRMS], primary progressive MS [PPMS], secondary progressive MS [SPMS], Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS] 3.0–6.5) (1 Class II). Six weeks' worth of comprehensive multidisciplinary outpatient rehabilitation possibly is effective for improving disability/function (PPMS, SPMS, EDSS 4.0–8.0) (1 Class II). Motor and sensory balance training or motor balance training (3 weeks) possibly is effective for improving static and dynamic balance, and motor balance training (3 weeks) possibly is effective for improving static balance (RRMS, SPMS, PPMS) (1 Class II). Breathing-enhanced upper extremity exercises (6 weeks) possibly are effective for improving timed gait and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (RRMS, SPMS, PPMS, mean EDSS 4.5); this change is of unclear clinical significance. This technique possibly is ineffective for improving disability (1 Class II). Inspiratory muscle training (10 weeks) possibly improves maximal inspiratory pressure (RRMS, SPMS, PPMS, EDSS 2–6.5) (1 Class II).