Neurological Performance Assessment
Neurological Performance Assessment - Related Videos
06:12
Recording Horizontal Saccade Performances Accurately in Neurological Patients Using Electro-oculogram
0 Views •
Cited by 4 •
2018
The article describes a practical method for recording horizontal eye movements with high accuracy by electro-oculogram in neurological patients, using a cup Ag-AgCl electrode with a wide plastic fringe. Stable measurement requires proper selection and fixation of electrodes, taking sufficient time for light adaptation to occur, and re-calibration as needed.
08:11
Measuring Progressive Neurological Disability in a Mouse Model of Multiple Sclerosis
0 Views •
Cited by 21 •
2016
An optimized testing protocol is presented in this paper for the Rotarod performance test, used for measuring progressive neurological disability in TMEV-infected mice.
05:12
Swimming Performance Assessment in Fishes
0 Views •
Cited by 56 •
2011
The lives of the majority of fish are predicated on swimming. This protocol describes techniques for capturing a range of swimming modes available to individual and schooling fish, and includes metrics associated with swimming physiology and behaviour.
11:35
The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test (MSPT): An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool
0 Views •
Cited by 106 •
2014
Precise measurement of neurological and neuropsychological impairment and disability in multiple sclerosis is challenging. We report methodologic details on a new test, the Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test (MSPT). This new approach to the objective of quantification of MS related disability provides a computer-based platform for precise, valid measurement of MS severity.
10:32
Assessing Functional Performance in the Mdx Mouse Model
0 Views •
Cited by 184 •
2014
The primary outcome measure in clinical trials for neuromuscular disorders is generally improved muscle function. Therefore, assessing the effect of potential therapeutic compounds on muscle performance pre clinically in mouse models is of great importance. We here describe several functional tests to address this.
FAQs
Standardized scoring makes findings more consistent across examinations, clinicians, and time points. Repeated measurements show whether neurological function is stable, improving, or worsening rather than relying on a single observation. This longitudinal information helps clinicians evaluate recovery after injury, recognize progression of disease, assess treatment-related change, and communicate functional status more clearly.
Mental status, cranial nerve function, sensation, strength, reflexes, coordination, balance, and gait examine different aspects of nervous system performance. Considering these domains together helps clinicians characterize the pattern of impairment instead of focusing on one isolated finding. The combined profile can support diagnostic decisions and provide a structured description of functional abilities.
Observed responses are interpreted by comparing them with expected performance for the examination task. This comparison helps distinguish preserved function from impairment and gives meaning to findings across multiple domains. Consistent expectations also make results easier to compare between visits, supporting baseline establishment, monitoring, and communication among healthcare professionals.
A baseline records functional status before or early in the course of care, while later assessments provide comparison points. Differences in mental status, movement-related performance, sensation, balance, gait, or other examined domains may indicate recovery, progression, or response to treatment. Repeated, consistently scored evaluations make these changes more interpretable than isolated observations.
A typical workflow establishes the person’s current functional baseline, examines relevant nervous system domains, records observed responses, and compares them with expected performance. Findings are then scored or documented consistently so they can guide clinical decisions and support later comparison. Repeating the same structured approach improves the value of follow-up measurements.
It is particularly useful when clinicians need to detect or characterize neurological impairment, establish a baseline, or follow functional change after injury, disease, or treatment. The results can inform diagnostic decisions and show whether performance is changing over time. Its repeated use also supports coordinated care by giving healthcare professionals a shared account of function.
Clinical research benefits from consistent examinations and repeated measurements because they produce structured information about functional status and change. Scored findings can help researchers compare outcomes over time and evaluate recovery, progression, or treatment-related differences. The same consistency strengthens communication among study teams and improves the interpretability of neurological outcomes.