PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16914066

Paratonia: a Delphi procedure for consensus definition.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Paratonia is a motor problem that develops during the course of dementia. Definitions of paratonia used in the literature differ considerably, which has clinical implications and may lead to an undesirable heterogeneity in study populations. For this reason, we initiated a Delphi procedure with known experts in the field to establish an operational consensus definition of paratonia. METHODS: The Delphi procedure involved an anonymous and multistage approach presented as a questionnaire, with each stage building on the results of the previous one in order to reach consensus on the definition of paratonia. RESULTS: Eight of 17 experts agreed to participate in the study. After 4 rounds, the participants reached consensus on the following definition: paratonia is a form of hypertonia with an involuntary variable resistance during passive movement. The nature of paratonia may change with progression of dementia (eg, from active assistance (aka Mitgehen) to active resistance). The degree of resistance depends on the speed of movement (eg, slow > low resistance, fast > high resistance). The degree of paratonia is proportional to the amount of force applied and increases with progression of dementia. The resistance to passive movement is in any direction and there is no clasp-knife phenomenon. CONCLUSION: The Delphi procedure resulted in a comprehensive, operational definition of paratonia. Future research should focus on the reliability and validity of this definition.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Johannes S M Hobbelen, Raymond T C M Koopmans, Frans R J Verhey, Roland P S Van Peppen, Rob A de Bie. 2006. Paratonia: a Delphi procedure for consensus definition.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16914066/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Can we achieve international agreement on terminologies and definitions used to describe abnormalities of menstrual bleeding?

BACKGROUND: There is considerable worldwide confusion in the use of terminologies and definitions around the symptom of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB), and these are leading increasingly to difficulties in setting up multinational clinical trials and in interpreting the results of studies undertaken in single centres. An international initiative was established to develop an agreement process to recommend clear, simple terminologies and definitions with the potential for wide acceptance. METHODS: After widespread consultation with relevant international and national organizations, journal editors and individuals, a modified Delphi process was developed to assess the current use of terminologies followed by a structured face-to-face meeting of 35 clinicians (mostly gynaecologists) and scientists in Washington. Focused small group discussions led to plenary assessment of concepts and recommendations using an electronic keypad voting system. RESULTS: There was almost universal agreement that poorly defined terms of classical origin used in differing ways in the English medical language should be discarded and that these should be replaced by simple, descriptive terms with clear definitions which have the potential to be understood by health professional and patient alike and which can be translated into most languages. The major recommendations were to replace terms such as menorrhagia, metrorrhagia, hypermenorrhoea and dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Suggestions for potentially suitable replacement terms and definitions are made. CONCLUSIONS: A simple terminology has been recommended for the description and definition of symptoms and signs of AUB. This manuscript should be a living document and should be part of an ongoing process with international medical and community debate. Classification of causes, investigations and cultural and quality of life issues should be part of the ongoing process.

Delphi Technique↗

Reporting data on homeopathic treatments (RedHot): a supplement to CONSORT*.

When homeopathy is tested in clinical trials, understanding and appraisal are likely to be improved if published reports contain details of prescribing strategies and treatments. An international Delphi panel was convened to develop consensus guidelines for reporting homeopathic methods and treatments. The panel agreed 28 treatment- and provider-specific items that supplement the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement items 2, 3, 4 and 19. The authors recommend these for adoption by authors and journals when reporting trials of homeopathy.

Delphi Technique↗