Cargando…

The Feasibility of Using Acoustic Markers of Speech for Optimizing Patient Outcomes during Randomized Amplitude Variation in Deep Brain Stimulation: A Proof of Principle Methods Study

BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective treatment for reducing symptoms of tremor. A common and typically subjectively determined adverse effect of DBS is dysarthria. Current assessment protocols are driven by the qualitative judgments of treating clinicians and lack the sensitivity...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vogel, Adam P., McDermott, Hugh J., Perera, Thushara, Jones, Mary, Peppard, Richard, McKay, Colette M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4500958/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26236707
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2015.00098
_version_ 1782380985181011968
author Vogel, Adam P.
McDermott, Hugh J.
Perera, Thushara
Jones, Mary
Peppard, Richard
McKay, Colette M.
author_facet Vogel, Adam P.
McDermott, Hugh J.
Perera, Thushara
Jones, Mary
Peppard, Richard
McKay, Colette M.
author_sort Vogel, Adam P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective treatment for reducing symptoms of tremor. A common and typically subjectively determined adverse effect of DBS is dysarthria. Current assessment protocols are driven by the qualitative judgments of treating clinicians and lack the sensitivity and objectivity required to optimize patient outcomes where multiple stimulation parameters are trialed. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of DBS on speech in patients receiving stimulation to the posterior sub-thalamic area (PSA) via randomized manipulation of amplitude parameters. METHODS: Six patients diagnosed with tremor receiving treatment via DBS of the PSA were assessed in a double-blinded, within-subjects experimental protocol. Amplitude (i.e., voltage or current) was randomly adjusted across 10 settings, while speech samples (e.g., sustained vowel, counting to 10) were recorded to identify the patient-specific settings required for optimal therapeutic benefit (reduced tremor) with minimal adverse effects (altered speech). Speech production between stimulation parameters was quantified using acoustic analysis. RESULTS: Speech changed as a response to DBS but those changes were not uniform across patients nor were they generally in line with changes in amplitude with the exception of reduced vocal control and increased mean silence length in two patients. Speech outcomes did not correlate with changes in tremor. CONCLUSION: Intra-individual changes in speech were detected as a response to modified amplitude; however, no clear pattern was observed across patients as a group. The use of objective acoustic measures allows for quantification of speech changes during DBS optimization protocols, even when those changes are subtle and potentially difficult to detect perceptually.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4500958
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45009582015-07-31 The Feasibility of Using Acoustic Markers of Speech for Optimizing Patient Outcomes during Randomized Amplitude Variation in Deep Brain Stimulation: A Proof of Principle Methods Study Vogel, Adam P. McDermott, Hugh J. Perera, Thushara Jones, Mary Peppard, Richard McKay, Colette M. Front Bioeng Biotechnol Bioengineering and Biotechnology BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective treatment for reducing symptoms of tremor. A common and typically subjectively determined adverse effect of DBS is dysarthria. Current assessment protocols are driven by the qualitative judgments of treating clinicians and lack the sensitivity and objectivity required to optimize patient outcomes where multiple stimulation parameters are trialed. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of DBS on speech in patients receiving stimulation to the posterior sub-thalamic area (PSA) via randomized manipulation of amplitude parameters. METHODS: Six patients diagnosed with tremor receiving treatment via DBS of the PSA were assessed in a double-blinded, within-subjects experimental protocol. Amplitude (i.e., voltage or current) was randomly adjusted across 10 settings, while speech samples (e.g., sustained vowel, counting to 10) were recorded to identify the patient-specific settings required for optimal therapeutic benefit (reduced tremor) with minimal adverse effects (altered speech). Speech production between stimulation parameters was quantified using acoustic analysis. RESULTS: Speech changed as a response to DBS but those changes were not uniform across patients nor were they generally in line with changes in amplitude with the exception of reduced vocal control and increased mean silence length in two patients. Speech outcomes did not correlate with changes in tremor. CONCLUSION: Intra-individual changes in speech were detected as a response to modified amplitude; however, no clear pattern was observed across patients as a group. The use of objective acoustic measures allows for quantification of speech changes during DBS optimization protocols, even when those changes are subtle and potentially difficult to detect perceptually. Frontiers Media S.A. 2015-07-14 /pmc/articles/PMC4500958/ /pubmed/26236707 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2015.00098 Text en Copyright © 2015 Vogel, McDermott, Perera, Jones, Peppard and McKay. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Vogel, Adam P.
McDermott, Hugh J.
Perera, Thushara
Jones, Mary
Peppard, Richard
McKay, Colette M.
The Feasibility of Using Acoustic Markers of Speech for Optimizing Patient Outcomes during Randomized Amplitude Variation in Deep Brain Stimulation: A Proof of Principle Methods Study
title The Feasibility of Using Acoustic Markers of Speech for Optimizing Patient Outcomes during Randomized Amplitude Variation in Deep Brain Stimulation: A Proof of Principle Methods Study
title_full The Feasibility of Using Acoustic Markers of Speech for Optimizing Patient Outcomes during Randomized Amplitude Variation in Deep Brain Stimulation: A Proof of Principle Methods Study
title_fullStr The Feasibility of Using Acoustic Markers of Speech for Optimizing Patient Outcomes during Randomized Amplitude Variation in Deep Brain Stimulation: A Proof of Principle Methods Study
title_full_unstemmed The Feasibility of Using Acoustic Markers of Speech for Optimizing Patient Outcomes during Randomized Amplitude Variation in Deep Brain Stimulation: A Proof of Principle Methods Study
title_short The Feasibility of Using Acoustic Markers of Speech for Optimizing Patient Outcomes during Randomized Amplitude Variation in Deep Brain Stimulation: A Proof of Principle Methods Study
title_sort feasibility of using acoustic markers of speech for optimizing patient outcomes during randomized amplitude variation in deep brain stimulation: a proof of principle methods study
topic Bioengineering and Biotechnology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4500958/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26236707
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2015.00098
work_keys_str_mv AT vogeladamp thefeasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT mcdermotthughj thefeasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT pererathushara thefeasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT jonesmary thefeasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT peppardrichard thefeasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT mckaycolettem thefeasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT vogeladamp feasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT mcdermotthughj feasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT pererathushara feasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT jonesmary feasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT peppardrichard feasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy
AT mckaycolettem feasibilityofusingacousticmarkersofspeechforoptimizingpatientoutcomesduringrandomizedamplitudevariationindeepbrainstimulationaproofofprinciplemethodsstudy