Inhibition and synchronisation of tremor induced by a muscle twitch

Therapeutic Devices for Motor Symptoms in Parkinson’s Disease: Current Progress and a Systematic Review of Recent Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Pharmacotherapy is the first-line treatment option for Parkinson’s disease, and levodopa is considered the most effective drug for managing motor symptoms. However, side effects such as motor fluctuation and dyskinesia have been associated with levodopa treatment. For these conditions, alternative therapies, including invasive and non-invasive medical devices, may be helpful. This review sheds light on current progress in the development of devices to alleviate motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease.

Methods

We first conducted a narrative literature review to obtain an overview of current invasive and non-invasive medical devices and thereafter performed a systematic review of recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of these devices.

Results

Our review revealed different characteristics of each device and their effectiveness for motor symptoms. Although invasive medical devices are usually highly effective, surgical procedures can be burdensome for patients and have serious side effects. In contrast, non-pharmacological/non-surgical devices have fewer complications. RCTs of non-invasive devices, especially non-invasive brain stimulation and mechanical peripheral stimulation devices, have proven effectiveness on motor symptoms. Nearly no non-invasive devices have yet received Food and Drug Administration certification or a CE mark.

Conclusion

Invasive and non-invasive medical devices have unique characteristics, and several RCTs have been conducted for each device. Invasive devices are more effective, while non-invasive devices are less effective and have lower hurdles and risks. It is important to understand the characteristics of each device and capitalize on these.

Using Machine Learning for Predicting the Best Outcomes With Electrical Muscle Stimulation for Tremors in Parkinson's Disease

Recent studies have identified that peripheral stimulation in Parkinson’s disease (PD) is effective in tremor reduction, indicating that a peripheral feedback loop plays an important role in the tremor reset mechanism. This was an open-label, quasi-experimental, pre- and post-test design, single-blind, single-group study involving 20 tremor-dominant PD patients. The objective of this study is to explore the effect of electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) as an adjunctive treatment for resting tremor during “on” period and to identify the best machine learning model to predict the suitable stimulation level that will yield the longest period of tremor reduction or tremor reset time. In this study, we used a Parkinson’s glove to evaluate, stimulate, and quantify the tremors of PD patients. This adjustable glove incorporates a 3-axis gyroscope to measure tremor signals and an EMS to provide an on-demand muscle stimulation to suppress tremors. Machine learning models were applied to identify the suitable pulse amplitude (stimulation level) in five classes that led to the longest tremor reset time. The study was registered at the www.clinicaltrials.gov under the name “The Study of Rest Tremor Suppression by Using Electrical Muscle Stimulation” (NCT02370108). Twenty tremor-dominant PD patients were recruited. After applying an average pulse amplitude of 6.25 (SD 2.84) mA and stimulation period of 440.7 (SD 560.82) seconds, the total time of tremor reduction, or tremor reset time, was 329.90 (SD 340.91) seconds. A significant reduction in tremor parameters during stimulation was demonstrated by a reduction of Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) scores, and objectively, with a reduction of gyroscopic data (p < 0.05, each). None of the subjects reported any serious adverse events. We also compared gyroscopic data with five machine learning techniques: Logistic Regression, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Neural Network (NN), and Long-Short-Term-Memory (LSTM). The machine learning model that gave the highest accuracy was LSTM, which obtained: accuracy = 0.865 and macro-F1 = 0.736. This study confirms the efficacy of EMS in the reduction of resting tremors in PD. LSTM was identified as the most effective model for predicting pulse amplitude that would elicit the longest tremor reset time. Our study provides further insight on the tremor reset mechanism in PD.

Medical Devices for Tremor Suppression: Current Status and Future Directions

Tremors are the most prevalent movement disorder that interferes with the patient’s daily living, and physical activities, ultimately leading to a reduced quality of life. Due to the pathophysiology of tremor, developing effective pharmacotherapies, which are only suboptimal in the management of tremor, has many challenges. Thus, a range of therapies are necessary in managing this progressive, aging-associated disorder. Surgical interventions such as deep brain stimulation are able to provide durable tremor control. However, due to high costs, patient and practitioner preference, and perceived high risks, their utilization is minimized. Medical devices are placed in a unique position to bridge this gap between lifestyle interventions, pharmacotherapies, and surgical treatments to provide safe and effective tremor suppression. Herein, we review the mechanisms of action, safety and efficacy profiles, and clinical applications of different medical devices that are currently available or have been previously investigated for tremor suppression. These devices are primarily noninvasive, which can be a beneficial addition to the patient’s existing pharmacotherapy and/or lifestyle intervention.

Tremor's glove-an innovative electrical muscle stimulation therapy for intractable tremor in Parkinson's disease: A randomized sham-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Medically refractory resting tremor is a debilitating symptom of Parkinson's disease (PD) patients. In our pilot study, modulation of peripheral reflex mechanism by electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) temporarily suppressed tremor.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy of EMS, delivered using Tremor's glove, as a treatment of resting hand tremor.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty PD patients with medically refractory resting tremor were randomly allocated to a Tremor's glove group (n=15) or a sham glove group (n=15). Gloves were placed on the most tremulous hand for 30min per testing session. Demographics, clinical rating scales, and tremor parameters (RMS of angular velocity and angular displacement, peak magnitude, and frequency) were assessed before and during stimulation. Correlations with validated clinical rating scales were performed.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between groups in demographics, rating scales, or tremor parameters. During stimulation, significant reduction in RMS angular velocity (as percentage) in every axis and peak magnitude in axis (x-, y-) and UPDRS tremor score, were found with Tremor's glove compared to the sham groups (p<0.05, each). Significant moderate correlations were observed between a percentage reduction of RMS angular velocity in every axis and UPDRS tremor scores. Mean duration of tremor reduction after stimulation was 107.78±104.15s. No serious adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSION

In this study, EMS-based Tremor's glove was effective in suppressing resting hand tremor in PD patients. Tremor's glove is light-weight with a good safety profile, making it a future potential therapeutic option for PD patients with medically refractory tremor.

Impact of different stimulation types on orthostatic tremor

OBJECTIVE

Primary orthostatic tremor (OT) is thought to be generated by a unique supraspinal tremor generator. Here we studied the effect of ipsi- and contralateral stimulation of the central and peripheral nervous system on OT.

METHODS

In 7 patients with primary OT, surface EMG was recorded from both tibialis anterior muscles. We performed transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the vertex, and lumbar magnetic stimulation (LMS) over the lumbar spine. Supramaximal electrical nerve stimuli were applied to the tibial or peroneal nerve at the knee. Proprioceptive input was evoked by rhythmical submaximal stimulation of the tibial, peroneal or sural nerve at the ankle.

RESULTS

TMS reset OT significantly in the contralateral as well as the ipsilateral tibialis anterior muscle. The resetting in both muscles was identical. In contrast, peripheral input by means of LMS, supra- or submaximal nerve stimulation had no impact on OT.

CONCLUSIONS

Transcranial magnetic stimulation of one cortical leg area resets OT in both legs whereas OT is not modified by any peripheral stimuli applied in this study.

SIGNIFICANCE

Our results support the hypothesis of n unique supraspinal OT generator. This generator receives a modulating input from the motor cortex.

Vibratory proprioceptive stimulation affects Parkinsonian tremor

Previous research on tremor pathophysiology showed that tremor can be affected, e.g. by electrical stimulation of the peripheral nerve, mechanical perturbation of the limb and by transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex. This report is focused on possible effects of muscle vibration (MV) on resting tremor in Parkinson's Disease (PD). Vibratory stimulation was applied to the tendons of M. extensor carpi radialis longus and M. flexor ulnaris in 27 subjects with moderate PD resting tremor. The following effects were observed: (1) tremor stopped or started time-locked to MV onset and offset, (2) tremor persisted during MV but its frequency pattern changed. These results are discussed with specific emphasis to effects of MV on spinal and supraspinal levels.

Influence of proprioceptive input on parkinsonian tremor

Previous studies have shown a modification of parkinsonian tremor (PT) by proprioceptive input induced by passive joint movements. The authors investigated the impact of electrically evoked proprioceptive input on PT. In eight patients with PT they recorded surface EMG from the opponens pollicis muscle, and forearm extensors and flexors. Rhythmic electrical stimulation was applied to the ipsilateral median nerve at the wrist using a submaximal stimulus intensity and stimulus frequencies between two stimuli per second and five stimuli per second. The tremor frequency did not adapt to the stimulus frequency. Tremor frequency of parkinsonian resting tremor increased significantly in the directly stimulated opponens pollicis muscle (mean +/- standard deviation, 4.35 +/- 0.64 Hz without stimulation versus 4.53 +/- 0.68 Hz with stimulation; P < 0.05, paired t-test), the not directly stimulated forearm muscles (4.90 +/- 0.72 Hz versus 5.18 +/- 0.73 Hz, P < 0.001), and the upper arm muscles (5.13 +/- 0.61 Hz versus 5.36 +/- 0.68 Hz, P < 0.01). Furthermore, the parkinsonian postural tremor accelerated significantly during ipsilateral median nerve stimulation (5.31 +/- 0.99 Hz versus 5.44 +/- 1.03 Hz, P < 0.05). Parkinsonian resting tremor in the forearm muscles also accelerated significantly during ipsilateral ulnar nerve stimulation (4.85 +/- 0.57 Hz versus 5.05 +/- 0.65 Hz, P < 0.05). Contralateral median nerve stimulation had no significant effect. These results suggest a close interaction between proprioceptive input and PT generation.

Evidence for a non-orthostatic origin of orthostatic tremor

OBJECTIVES

Orthostatic tremor was first described by Heilman in 1984. It usually occurs in the legs during stance and decreases markedly during sitting or walking. The aim of this study was to determine if orthostatic tremor is invariably associated with the orthostatic and weight bearing conditions in the arms and legs, and to investigate the features of orthostatic tremor under different levels of peripheral loading.

METHODS

Multichannel surface EMG recordings were obtained under different conditions (body posture and peripheral loading) from the proximal arm and leg muscles of seven patients fulfilling the clinical and electrophysiological criteria of orthostatic tremor.

RESULTS

In weight bearing positions (stance; weight bearing on the hands on all fours), all patients showed 13 Hz-16 Hz tremor activity, predominantly in the active limb. No tremor activity could be found in a supine position with muscles at rest. Isometric contraction of the limbs in the supine position led to synchronous 13 Hz-16 Hz rhythmic activity in five patients. No tremor was seen when the subjects were suspended in a harness with relaxed legs. Isometric contraction of the legs in this position produced tremor in two patients. A stepwise reduction of the body weight by a harness reduced the tremor activity. Additional loading (10 kg-20 kg) during stance led to an increase in tremor amplitude, but tremor frequency remained unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Orthostatic tremor is invariably present during stance or other weight bearing positions. It is not, however, always associated with orthostasis. In at least some patients it can be classified as an orthostasis independent action tremor. The failure of peripheral loading to modify tremor frequency indicates that orthostatic tremor may have a central, rather than a peripheral, origin.

Orthostatic tremor: an electrophysiological analysis

Orthostatic tremor (OT) is a clinically defined syndrome of leg tremor while standing. Controversy surrounds whether OT is a distinct syndrome or is an essential tremor (ET) variant. We report two patients with OT. Electrophysiological testing included polymyography, accelerometry, nerve conduction, and evoked potential studies. The effects of various maneuvers and body positions on the tremor were assessed. The findings included rapid (15-17 Hz) lower-extremity tremor burst frequency evoked by standing but not by walking or swaying; rapid upper-extremity burst pattern synchronous with lower-extremity bursts; and failure of electrical stimulation or mental concentration to "reset" the tremor. Additionally, there was the novel finding of accelerometric recordings in the legs revealing the same rapid frequency (16-17 Hz) as the electromyographic tremor bursts. Some prior reports have suggested that OT is related to ET by emphasizing a considerable disparity and variability between the accelerometric tremor frequency and the electromyographic burst frequency. In our patients, however, the rapid (15-17 Hz) accelerometer-recorded tremor synchronous with the electromyographic bursts, and also the clinical improvement with clonazepam but not beta blockers or mysoline, and the lack of a family history of ET provide support that OT is distinct from ET.

Modulation of postural tremors at the wrist by supramaximal electrical median nerve shocks in essential tremor, Parkinson's disease and normal subjects mimicking tremor

The response of postural wrist tremors to supramaximal median nerve stimulation was examined in patients with hereditary essential tremor (n = 10) and Parkinson's disease (n = 9), and in normal subjects mimicking wrist tremor (n = 8). The average frequency of on-going tremor was the same in all three groups. Supramaximal peripheral nerve shocks inhibited and then synchronised the rhythmic electromyographic (EMG) activity of all types of tremor. The duration of inhibition ranged from 90 to 210ms, varying inversely with the frequency of on-going tremor. There was no significant difference in mean duration of inhibition or in the timing of the first peak after stimulation on the average rectified EMG records between the three groups. The degree to which supramaximal peripheral nerve shocks could modulate the timing of rhythmic EMG bursts in the forearm flexor muscles was also quantified by deriving a resetting index. No significant difference in mean resetting index of the three groups was found. These results suggest that such studies cannot be used to differentiate between the common causes of postural wrist tremors.

Modulation of postural wrist tremors by magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex in patients with Parkinson's disease or essential tremor and in normal subjects mimicking tremor

The effect of magnetic brain stimulation on postural wrist tremor was studied in 10 patients with Parkinson's disease, 12 with hereditary essential tremor, and 10 normal subjects who mimicked tremor by making rapid alternating wrist movements. In all patients and normal subjects, magnetic brain stimulation over the contralateral motor cortex at an intensity approximately 10% above threshold produced the following sequence of events: (1) a small direct electromyographic (EMG) response, followed by (2) suppression of the rhythmic EMG activity responsible for the tremor, before (3) reappearance of the tremor time-locked to the stimulus. It is concluded that magnetic brain stimulation over the motor cortex can modulate the oscillatory mechanisms responsible for the generation of postural tremors. Group analysis revealed that the time to reappearance of rhythmic EMG activity varied significantly with the period of parkinsonian postural tremors, but not with the period of essential or mimicked tremors. Magnetic stimulation also significantly shortened the period of parkinsonian postural tremors, but did not influence the period of essential or mimicked tremors. These behavioral differences indicate differences in the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying parkinsonian postural tremor and essential tremor.

Primary orthostatic tremor: further observations in six cases

The clinical and physiological features of six new patients with primary orthostatic tremor are described. We suggest that use of the term primary orthostatic tremor be confined to the clinical syndrome in which unsteadiness when standing is the predominant complaint and accompanied by characteristic electrophysiological findings of a rapid (frequency around 16 Hz), regular leg tremor which is not influenced by peripheral feedback, is synchronous between homologous leg muscles, and in certain postures of the upper limbs, between muscles of the arm and leg. The fast frequency of muscle activity in primary orthostatic tremor of the legs causes unsteadiness when standing (presumably due to partially fused muscle contraction) but only a fine ripple of muscle activity is visible. In contrast, the slower frequency of other leg tremors, for example essential tremor, results in obvious leg movement which is evident in many leg postures, is variable over time and can be reset by a peripheral nerve stimulus. Essential tremor and orthostatic tremor do not respond to the same therapies, suggesting differences in the pharmacological profiles of the two conditions. Accordingly, there are clinical, physiological and pharmacological differences between primary orthostatic and essential tremor. Whether these factors are sufficient to regard these tremors as separate conditions is discussed.

Isometric features of orthostatic tremor: an electromyographic analysis

A patient is described with "orthostatic" tremor. Electromyography revealed tremor bursts of 15 Hz in the lower extremities while standing and with isometric activation of the muscles, but the bursts disappeared with isotonic activation of muscles. Similar tremor was recorded in the arms with isometric, but not isotonic activation. Review of previously reported cases confirms these findings. The clinical and electrophysiologic features of this tremor distinguish it from other recognized forms of tremor.

Adrenergic beta-receptor sensitivity in essential tremor

Adrenergic beta-receptor sensitivity of six male patients with essential tremor and six age-matched normal controls was assessed by measuring the response in the heart rate and postural tremor to incremental injections of the adrenergic beta-agonist isoprenaline. The relative increase in heart rate and tremor in essential tremor patients did not differ from that in normal controls. It is concluded that no major abnormality is likely to exist in the peripheral adrenergic beta-receptor sensitivity in essential tremor.