Movement Disorder Society Task Force report on the Hoehn and Yahr staging scale: Status and recommendations The Movement Disorder Society Task Force on rating scales for Parkinson's disease

The Movement Disorder Society Task Force for Rating Scales for Parkinson's disease (PD) prepared a critique of the Hoehn and Yahr scale (HY). Strengths of the HY scale include its wide utilization and acceptance. Progressively higher stages correlate with neuroimaging studies of dopaminergic loss, and high correlations exist between the HY scale and some standardized scales of motor impairment, disability, and quality of life. Weaknesses include the scale's mixing of impairment and disability and its non‐linearity. Because the HY scale is weighted heavily toward postural instability as the primary index of disease severity, it does not capture completely impairments or disability from other motor features of PD and gives no information on nonmotor problems. Direct clinimetric testing of the HY scale has been very limited, but the scale fulfills at least some criteria for reliability and validity, especially for the midranges of the scale (Stages 2–4). Although a “modified HY scale” that includes 0.5 increments has been adopted widely, no clinimetric data are available on this adaptation. The Task Force recommends that: (1) the HY scale be used in its original form for demographic presentation of patient groups; (2) when the HY scale is used for group description, medians and ranges should be reported and analysis of changes should use nonparametric methods; (3) in research settings, the HY scale is useful primarily for defining inclusion/exclusion criteria; (4) to retain simplicity, clinicians should “rate what you see” and therefore incorporate comorbidities when assigning a HY stage; and (5) because of the wide usage of the modified HY scale with 0.5 increments, this adaptation warrants clinimetric testing. Without such testing, however, the original five‐point scales should be maintained. © 2004 Movement Disorder Society

[1]  G. Canter,et al.  A METHOD FOR EVALUATING DISABILITY IN PATIENTS WITH PARKINSON'S DISEASE , 1961, The Journal of nervous and mental disease.

[2]  B. Djahanguiri,et al.  The prevention of acute gastric ulcer in the rat by alpha-methyldopa. , 1967, Medicina et pharmacologia experimentalis. International journal of experimental medicine.

[3]  M. Hoehn,et al.  Parkinsonism , 1967, Neurology.

[4]  Webster Dd,et al.  Critical analysis of the disability in Parkinson's disease. , 1968 .

[5]  D. Webster Critical analysis of the disability in Parkinson's disease. , 1968, Modern treatment.

[6]  R. Marttila,et al.  DISABILITY AND PROGRESSION IN PARKINSON'S DISEASE , 1977, Acta Neurologica Scandinavica.

[7]  M. M. Maier Hoehn Parkinsonism treated with levodopa: progression and mortality. , 1983, Journal of neural transmission. Supplementum.

[8]  Parkinsonism treated with levodopa: progression and mortality. , 1983 .

[9]  C. Marsden,et al.  Recent Developments in Parkinson's Disease , 1986 .

[10]  S. Fahn Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale , 1987 .

[11]  No evidence for an association between glyoxalase I and haptoglobin in nine Spanish populations. , 1987, Human heredity.

[12]  Kathryn M. Culig,et al.  MRI Findings in Normal Aging and Alzheimer's Disease , 1987 .

[13]  C. Tanner,et al.  Progression of Parkinson's disease without levodopa , 1987, Neurology.

[14]  N. Reynolds,et al.  Factor analysis of Parkinson's impairment. An evaluation of the final common pathway. , 1987, Archives of neurology.

[15]  L. Amaducci,et al.  Evaluation of Parkinson's disease: reliability of three rating scales. , 1988, Neuroepidemiology.

[16]  J. Jankovic,et al.  Variable expression of Parkinson's disease , 1990, Neurology.

[17]  B. Everitt,et al.  Scales for rating motor impairment in Parkinson's disease: studies of reliability and convergent validity. , 1991, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[18]  Giuliano Geminiani,et al.  Interobserver reliability between neurologists in training of Parkinson's disease rating scales. A multicenter study , 1991, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[19]  L. Amaducci,et al.  Evaluation of Parkinson's disease: a new approach to disability. , 1991, Neuroepidemiology.

[20]  M. Pinter,et al.  Quantification of motor deficit in Parkinson's disease with a motor performance test series , 1992, Journal of neural transmission. Parkinson's disease and dementia section.

[21]  J. Morris,et al.  Reliability of the columbia scale for assessing signs of parkinson's disease , 1993, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[22]  M Schulzer,et al.  Longitudinal fluorodopa positron emission tomographic studies of the evolution of idiopathic parkinsonism , 1994, Annals of neurology.

[23]  A. H. Zwinderman,et al.  Rating impairment and disability in Parkinson's disease: Evaluation of the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale , 1994, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[24]  P. Martínez-Martín,et al.  Unified Parkinson's disease rating scale characteristics and structure , 1994, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[25]  T. Ishikawa,et al.  Assessment of disease severity in parkinsonism with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose and PET. , 1995, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[26]  J. Hubble,et al.  Pramipexole in patients with early Parkinson's disease. , 1995, Clinical neuropharmacology.

[27]  E. van der Velde,et al.  Clinical course of patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease , 1996, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[28]  J. Friedman,et al.  Efficacy of pramipexole, a novel dopamine agonist, as monotherapy in mild to moderate Parkinson's disease , 1997, Neurology.

[29]  A. Lieberman,et al.  Clinical evaluation of pramipexole in advanced Parkinson's disease: Results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study , 1997, Neurology.

[30]  R. Fitzpatrick,et al.  The Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39): development and validation of a Parkinson's disease summary index score. , 1997, Age and ageing.

[31]  M. Guttman Double-blind comparison of pramipexole and bromocriptine treatment with placebo in advanced Parkinson's disease , 1997, Neurology.

[32]  Z. Faulkes,et al.  A map of distal leg motor neurons in the thoracic ganglia of four decapod crustacean species. , 1997, Brain, behavior and evolution.

[33]  C. Marsden,et al.  Abstracts. Third international dystonia symposium , 1997 .

[34]  D. Brooks,et al.  Evaluation of the Short Parkinson's Evaluation Scale: a new friendly scale for the evaluation of Parkinson's disease in clinical drug trials. , 1997, Clinical neuropharmacology.

[35]  G. Stebbins,et al.  Factor structure of the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale: Motor examination section , 1998, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[36]  M. Hely,et al.  The Sydney multicentre study of Parkinson’s disease: progression and mortality at 10 years , 1999, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[37]  M. Pinter,et al.  Efficacy, safety, and tolerance of the non-ergoline dopamine agonist pramipexole in the treatment of advanced Parkinson’s disease: a double blind, placebo controlled, randomised, multicentre study , 1999, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[38]  D. Price,et al.  An analysis of factors that contribute to the magnitude of placebo analgesia in an experimental paradigm , 1999, PAIN.

[39]  A. Lang,et al.  Factor analysis of the motor section of the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale during the off‐state , 1999, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[40]  I Litvan,et al.  Progression of Hoehn and Yahr stages in parkinsonian disorders: A clinicopathologic study , 2000, Neurology.

[41]  John Seibyl,et al.  Pramipexole vs levodopa as initial treatment for Parkinson disease: A randomized controlled trial. Parkinson Study Group. , 2000, JAMA.

[42]  G. Stebbins,et al.  Differential progression of motor impairment in levodopa‐treated Parkinson's disease , 2000, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[43]  Susan L. Mitchell,et al.  Patterns of Outcome Measurement in Parkinson’s Disease Clinical Trials , 2000, Neuroepidemiology.

[44]  A Schrag,et al.  The EQ-5D—a generic quality of life measure—is a useful instrument to measure quality of life in patients with Parkinson's disease , 2000, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[45]  A. Bonnet [The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale]. , 2000, Revue neurologique.

[46]  J. Unterrainer,et al.  Measuring the progression of idiopathic Parkinson's disease with [123I] β-CIT SPECT , 2000, Journal of Neural Transmission.

[47]  R M Werner,et al.  The EQ-5D—a generic quality of life measure—is a useful instrument to measure quality of life in patients with Parkinson's disease , 2001, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[48]  S B Bird,et al.  Clinically significant changes in pain along the visual analog scale. , 2001, Annals of emergency medicine.

[49]  A. Stiggelbout,et al.  Systematic evaluation of rating scales for impairment and disability in Parkinson's disease , 2002, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[50]  R. Hills,et al.  Evaluating drug treatments for Parkinson's disease: how good are the trials? , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[51]  Andrew J. Lees,et al.  Management of Parkinson's disease: An evidence‐based review , 2002, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[52]  Michael P McDermott,et al.  Development and testing of the Parkinson's disease quality of life scale , 2003, Movement Disorders.

[53]  W. Poewe,et al.  The natural history of parkinson's disease , 1998, Journal of neurology.