Neurology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Correspondence:
Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Correspondence are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Struck, L. K.
Right arrow Articles by Dobson, J. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Struck, L. K.
Right arrow Articles by Dobson, J. K.
NEUROLOGY 1990;40:467
© 1990 American Academy of Neurology

Circadian fluctuations of contrast sensitivity in Parkinson's disease

Lynn K. Struck, MD, Robert L. Rodnitzky, MD and Judith K. Dobson, RN

Department of Neurology, University of Iowa College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA.

Spontaneous circadian fluctuations of motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD) often occur, with dysfunction typically less severe in the early morning than in the afternoon. In 23 PD patients with or without a history of circadian motor fluctuations, we studied contrast sensitivity (CS), a non-motor function, considered to be dependent on dopaminergic transmission to see if it exhibits similar circadian variability. We tested CS throughout the day at 2-hour intervals beginning at 8:30 am. To facilitate multiple testing sessions, we used a rapid, printed, forced choice test of CS not requiring a motor response. We tested CS in 43 eyes in the PD patients and 23 eyes in 12 controls at spatial frequencies of 1.5,3,6,12, and 18 cycles per degree (cpd). At 8:30 am, CS in PD did not differ from that of controls, but at all other testing times it was significantly worse at 3 or more spatial frequencies. In PD, CS was significantly worse at 2:30 pm than at 8:30 am at 3 and 6 cpd, but in controls it was unchanged throughout the day. Separate analysis of CS in PD patients, with and without a history of circadian change in motor symptoms, revealed no significant difference between the groups. These results suggest that in PD a non-motor dopaminergic function can exhibit circadian variability and that this pattern can exist in the absence of similar variability in motor symptoms. Circadian variability which parallels the most common pattern of motor variability in PD supports the notion that the CS abnormality in this condition is related to dopamine deficiency.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Robert L. Rodnitzky, Department of Neurology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA 52242.

Received June 21,1989. Accepted for publication in final form August 8,1989.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1990 by AAN Enterprises, Inc.