Cargando…

Evaluation of Individualized Multi‐Disciplinary Inpatient Treatment for Functional Movement Disorders

BACKGROUND: Functional movement disorders (FMD) are associated with considerable morbidity and impairment of quality of life. Specialized treatment is scarce and data on efficacy of different therapies are limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a multi‐modal inpatient treatment program for patients with FM...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schmidt, Tamara, Ebersbach, Georg, Oelsner, Henriette, Sprock, Anette, König, Inke R., Bäumer, Tobias, Münchau, Alexander, Weissbach, Anne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8354066/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34401405
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mdc3.13268
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Functional movement disorders (FMD) are associated with considerable morbidity and impairment of quality of life. Specialized treatment is scarce and data on efficacy of different therapies are limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a multi‐modal inpatient treatment program for patients with FMD. METHODS: Thirty‐one patients with FMD were analyzed before (t1) and after multi‐modal inpatient treatment (t2) by a blinded video rating using the Psychogenic Movement Disorder Rating Scale (PMDRS), the simplified Functional Movement Disorder Rating Scale (S‐FMDRS), and the Clinical Global Impression Scale of Severity (CGI‐S), as well as patients' self‐rating. In 23 out of 31 patients a 5 months follow‐up investigation was performed (t3). Wilcoxon signed‐rank test and Friedman test were used for rating scale and self‐rating comparisons over time. Spearman correlation was used for correlation of symptom improvement and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Video rating revealed significant reduction of scores after therapy (median PMDRS t1 = 24, t2 = 8, P = 0.0006; S‐FMDRS t1 = 11, t2 = 4, P = 0.008; CGI‐S t1 = 4, t2 = 3, P = 0.000136) with sustained score decrease in follow‐up evaluations (PMDRS t1 = 31, t2 = 8, t3 = 7, P = 0.000032; S‐FMDRS t1 = 12, t2 = 4, t3 = 3, P = 0.000888; CGI‐S t1 = 4, t2 = 3, t3 = 3, P = 0.000032). Patients reported a stable reduction of symptoms in the self‐rating (CGI‐S t1 = 5, t2 = 4, t3 = 4, P = 0.016). Age correlated with treatment response with older patients showing better improvement, but disease duration did not correlate with outcome. Patients who suffered from physical trauma, sexual or physical abuse had smaller score reductions. CONCLUSION: Blinded video and self‐rating assessment showed significant score reduction in patients with FMD after an individualized interdisciplinary inpatient intervention.