The Neurologic Examination in Adult Psychiatry: From Soft Signs to Hard Science
Publication: The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
Abstract
Of the proliferating approaches to neuropsychiatric assessment, a relatively neglected technique is the venerable, accessible, noninvasive, and inexpensive neurologic examination. This article organizes and synthesizes the literature on neurological findings in adult psychiatric patients. Problems in conducting and interpreting research in this area are examined, clinically pertinent empirical findings are surveyed, and directions for future investigation are outlined. Most of the “soft signs” can be reliably evaluated, and many have been validated against other techniques. Several psychiatric diagnoses are associated with impaired neurologic performance. Prognosis and treatment selection may also be informed by neurologic findings. The neurologic exam should be regarded as a collection of neurobiologic probes rather than as a single irreducible variable. Future work must better establish interrater and test-retest reliability of individual elements of the neurologic exam in psychiatric populations and focus on developing the clinical utility of individual and combined elements of the neurologic exam.
The neurologic examination has two general functions in psychiatry. The first, screening for major neurological disease, is accomplished with an examination emphasizing such “hard” or “major” signs as reflex and motor asymmetry and the Babinski reflex. The results of each component of the screening examination can be described dichotomously as normal or abnormal. These results reflect the presence or absence of neuropathology, particularly that which is focal and acquired later in development. This article deals with the second objective of the psychiatric neurologic exam: evaluating performance decrements in psychiatric patients without identifiable neurologic disorders. This evaluation may be accomplished with an extended exam, which includes assessment for “soft” signs such as inaccurate motor sequencing and bilateral dysgraphesthesia. Such assessments may be described in terms of degree of performance decrement, rather than by the presence or absence of abnormality. These evaluations are often performed by physicians but are also represented in some neuropsychological batteries. Although these two functions—screening and evaluation—are conceptually distinguishable, the examinations serving these ends overlap substantially, and findings with significance in either context are hereafter referred to inclusively as neurologic exam abnormalities (NEA).
Classic descriptions of the psychiatric disorders often included neurological exam findings. Thus, “insane temperament,”1 “hysteria,”2 schizophrenia,3,4 mood disorders,5,6 and obsessive-compulsive disorder7 were each thought to have characteristic NEA. By mid-century the American psychiatric literature rarely mentioned neurologic findings. NEA research in child psychiatry then expanded as the concepts of “soft neurological signs”8 and “minimal brain dysfunction”9 became popular in the 1960s. This trend led to large pediatric studies10,11 and to much conceptual and methodologic clarification.12–15 Studies of NEA in adolescent16,17 and then adult18,19 psychiatric patients followed. Studies of NEA in adult psychiatric patients have increased in quantity and quality in recent years; recent texts again include NEA in descriptions of psychopathology.20,21
Since its use by Bender in 1947 to describe findings suggesting possible neurologic disease, the term soft signs has had other connotations, including a lack of diagnostic or anatomic specificity, a lack of reliability, and evanescence. Also “soft” are the boundaries of the category, considered by some to include such varied features as sinistrality, electroencephalographic dysrhythmias, and learning disabilities, as well as the more widely included NEA.22 Not surprisingly, some view the topic with derision: “The use of the terms ‘soft signs’ and ‘minimal brain damage’ is diagnostic of soft thinking.”23 However, summarily dismissing a heterogeneous collection of simple, noninvasive, and inexpensive assessment tools on the above bases could also be regarded as “diagnostic of soft thinking.” First, although anatomic specificity is uniquely valued in neurology, it may not be as important in psychiatry, in which localization is less central to diagnosis. Second, although the terms hard and soft imply that the former are reproducible and the latter not, the data suggest otherwise. Third, although some of the “soft” NEA may be evanescent, the extent of this has not been determined in adult psychiatric patients. Because state variation is common in psychiatric syndromes, temporal variability in neurological measures may offer some advantages; variability in performance may itself be an important parameter in psychiatry.24
The term neurological soft signs thus has multiple misleading meanings. Although it may be useful to characterize a set of data as “hard” or “soft” evidence of major neurologic disease, we suggest that the term not be used to describe individual signs.
The potential for the neurologic examination to add to diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment selection in an era of increasing fiscal limitations warrants an examination of the significance of NEA in adult psychiatry. This article, written primarily for researchers, summarizes the current knowledge base on the bedside neurologic examination in adult psychiatry, focusing on methodological issues and on enhancing the clinical relevance of work in this field. Although the boundaries blur between this and such related areas as neurophysiology and neuropsychology, we address techniques that can be readily applied in clinical settings and that would not be considered part of the routine mental status exam.
RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY
Components of the Examination
Psychiatric research on NEA has employed collections of neurologic examination items culled from clinical tradition or previous research (Table 1). Some batteries are partly or entirely drawn from general neurology texts,25–27 and some are selected from familiar neuropsychological batteries.28,29 Several scales were developed for use with children in the heyday of research into neurological aspects of pediatric psychiatry10–12,30,31 and have found application in adult populations.
The Neurological Evaluation Scale (NES),32 based on a review of NEA in schizophrenia,33 is the most fully described and widely employed instrument in adult psychiatry.32,34–39 Convit et al.40 also developed a composite examination, the Quantified Neurological Scale, which has been used mostly within that group. Chen et al.41 recently published, for use in adult psychiatry, a heterogeneous inventory of NEA and behavioral observations, with administration guidelines and reliability data for some of the inventory. Some scales31,40,41 additionally include items usually used to screen for frank neurologic disease but not frequently seen in psychiatric patients. The primitive (release, frontal release) reflexes are often dealt with separately.42 Rudimentary sensory function, extrapyramidal motor function, spontaneous abnormal movements, and blink rate are not generally included in these neurologic examination schedules. Thus, the available scales tap into somewhat different yet overlapping aspects of neurologic performance. It is important to note this when comparing studies of NEA, particularly when only summary scores are presented.
Each of the instruments referenced in Table 1 provides directions for administration, as well as some reliability and validity data. These instruments are best viewed as collections of individual examinations that need not be adopted in toto. It may often be more suitable to consider the items individually for inclusion in a clinical or research examination.
Reliability
Numerous threats to the reliability of NEA are worth considering. Many examination items, such as motor overflow, require subjectivity in rating, defying quantification unless special instruments are employed. Interrater agreement is more difficult to achieve when the abnormal response is merely an exaggeration of a normal phenomenon (e.g., tremor and postural sway). Subjectivity can also falsely elevate local agreement (attributable to the shared experience of examiners, as opposed to communicable standards13) and predispose to drift (weakening of interrater reliability over time15). Because of the difficulty of directly quantifying some NEA, these studies tend to collapse all data into ordinal or dichotomous formats for uniformity. This practice complicates the statistical approach to reliability assessment of individual exam items, reducing power and producing data that fall in the gray zone between what is suitable for intraclass correlation and what is suitable for the kappa statistic.43
Empirical data nevertheless suggest that interrater reliability is generally quite acceptable.13 It is compromised primarily in the more subjectively assessed NEA10,36,44–46 and in those requiring discriminations between normal and slightly abnormal.10,47 Establishing reliability with some of the “hard” NEA, most strikingly muscle stretch reflexes, may be at least as problematic as it is with psychiatrically significant NEA.10,44,46,48–50 For example, reliability estimates in the Isle of Wight study10 were higher for measures of coordination and “developmental abnormalities” than for muscle stretch reflexes. In studies of neurology inpatients, 25%50 and 43%49 of routinely assessed NEA fell below the common reliability threshold of kappa=0.4; in two populations of psychiatric patients, the corresponding percentages were 22% and 11%.36 A clearer understanding of how to conduct the examination improves reliability.42,44,48 Clinicians might require additional training to assess some of these signs as reliably as in research settings. Such training could be facilitated by video technology.
Less attention has been paid to test-retest reliability. Prospective studies of patients, involving repeated examinations,28,29,51–53 are required to clarify the state or trait aspects of NEA in psychiatric patients. Interpreting changes in performance over repeated neurologic exams in patients as a function of state change, though, will require data on the stability of NEA in the absence of potentially relevant state changes. Summary indices of NEA are stable in chronic schizophrenia.32 However, the test-retest reliability of individual NEA has rarely been examined in adult psychiatric populations. Using kappa greater than 0.4 as a threshold, and restricting analysis to items with adequate interrater reliability, two small studies have found that 33%36 and 44%54 of NEA could be consistently reproduced. Thus, temporal stability of NEA in adult psychiatric patients remains uncertain. Determining which of the NEA are replicable over time in stable patients is critical for interpreting longitudinal studies of state-related influences on neurologic functioning in psychiatry.
Groupings of Neurologic Exam Elements
Some studies ignore the heterogeneity of NEA, deriving a summary score to represent the overall severity of neurologic dysfunction or the total number of abnormal signs.26 At the opposite extreme, analyzing NEA individually has limitations due to limited statistical power with ordinal and categorical data, variable reliability among individual items, and problems attendant on multiple tests of significance. Assigning NEA to subscales might allow one to exploit the heterogeneity of NEA while avoiding the limitations of item-by-item analysis.
Some studies have grouped items on the basis of their presumed neuroanatomic substrates.25,41,55,56 This grouping is debatable in psychiatric patients without focal lesions: NEA do not necessarily have localizing significance in these populations. Rather than anatomical regions, NEA batteries could be indexed in terms of distributed neuroanatomical or neurochemical systems. Others15,22 categorize individual NEA as signs representing developmental delay, signs consistent with acquired focal brain injury, and subtle variants of focal signs. Many other variables might dictate the association of individual exam items, including their dependence on general intelligence, sustained attention, or motivation.
Five adult psychiatric studies, all involving schizophrenic patients, have used factor analytic techniques to derive item clusters for the neurologic exam,34,37,51,57,58 with inconsistent results. Further study of the natural organization of NEA in adult psychiatric patients, with adequate numbers of subjects, using appropriate statistics and limiting entered data to reliably assessed NEA, should help to establish defensible subscales.
Relationships With Other Neurologic Tests
A variety of neurophysiologic techniques have been used to characterize phenomena seen in the clinical neurologic exam. Smooth pursuit eye movements (SPEM),59 visual fixation,60 and extrapyramidal motor dysfunction61 have been studied instrumentally, and the palmomental reflex has been quantified following electrical elicitation.62 These relatively noninvasive and inexpensive methods can obviously help validate the bedside exam, but they have yet to be applied to most NEA. Neurophysiologic methods may also be used to explore biological correlates of NEA; two studies63,64 found relationships between EEG dysrhythmias and NEA, but others16,19,65 have not. SPEM dysfunction has been related to NEA among psychotic patients39,66 and nonpatients.67 Startle habituation has been related to global neurologic performance.34
Functional neuroimaging parameters seem to be unrelated to NEA in resting patients.56,68 However, less activation of the appropriate cortical regions is seen during motor tasks in schizophrenia and dementia patients than in comparison subjects.69–71 Further application of functional imaging and other neurophysiologic methods will be needed to clarify the mechanisms of NEA in patients without acquired focal lesions.
CLINICAL UTILITY
Differential Diagnosis
Diagnostic comparisons of NEA have mostly focused on dementia and the psychotic disorders. The neurologic exam could significantly clarify psychiatric differential diagnosis, particularly when the available history is limited. We survey findings to date in dementia and in psychotic, mood, and anxiety disorders (Table 2, first column).
Dementia has been studied with respect to differential diagnosis and severity. In contrast with normal control subjects, Alzheimer's disease patients have excesses of astereognosis, agraphesthesia, cerebellar findings, olfactory deficits, primitive reflexes, hyperreflexia, abnormal plantar responses, and extrapyramidal findings.72,73 Focal NEA, gait abnormalities, and dysarthria are associated with multi-infarct dementia, as opposed to other dementias.74,75 Early extrapyramidal findings may suggest dementia of the Lewy body type.76 Dementia secondary to alcoholism was strongly associated with ataxia and polyneuropathy in one study.77 Several other forms of dementia may be related to specific NEA.78 Primitive reflexes,72,79 olfactory deficits,80 and pyramidal,72 extrapyramidal,81,82 and other motor abnormalities79,81 are associated with the cross-sectional severity of dementia; this factor thus needs to be controlled for when comparing NEA across dementias. Potentially, in addition to helping to identify focal and multifocal lesions in patients with dementia, NEA might be found to distinguish between different types of primary degenerative dementia and between dementia and depressive pseudodementia.
The primary psychoses, particularly schizophrenia, are much investigated with respect to NEA (see reviews33,82). Many NEA, notably abnormalities of motor sequencing, coordination, and higher order sensory function,33 are more common in schizophrenic than in healthy subjects even when only neuroleptic-naive patients are included.27,35,56 Parkinsonian findings have also been described in neuroleptic-naive patients.60,83 Most data suggest that schizophrenic patients have more neurologic dysfunction than nonpsychotic patients, but the evidence is more mixed when comparing psychotic patients with different diagnoses.33,84–87 Some longitudinal data suggest an improvement in neurological performance with improvement in clinical state and/or treatment with antipsychotic medication.51,53 Variation in NEA due to clinical state or medications may thus obscure comparisons of diagnostic groups. Significant clinical benefits might be realized if NEA could distinguish between psychotic disorders, but further studies comparing diagnoses while controlling for treatment and clinical status will first be necessary.
Mood disorders have been neglected in NEA research. Abnormalities exceeding those of normal comparison subjects have been found in manic88 and mixed manic and depressed patients.89 Differences were found in motor control and sequencing, stereognosis, and graphesthesia. In studies comparing mood-disordered with schizophrenic patients, global NEA were fewer and/or milder in mood disorders,18,90–92 although two studies88,93 found few differences. Consistent with early descriptions of melancholia suggesting extrapyramidal dysfunction,5,6 depression and extrapyramidal dysfunction are related in Alzheimer's disease.81,94 There are few differences in NEA between unipolar and bipolar patients.25,29,89,92 The prevalence and diagnostic specificity of NEA in mood disorders remain unclear. The strong effects of psychiatric state on general functioning in the mood disorders, along with the mood-related variability of neurologic functioning evidenced in psychiatric patients,29,52 suggest that phase of illness will need to be considered. Diurnal variation may also have a significant impact on neurologic function in the mood disorders.95
Anxiety disorders have scarcely been investigated, with the exception of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). NEA are more frequent in OCD patients than in normal comparison subjects,96–99 although this finding was not replicated in female OCD patients.100 Specific findings include poor motor coordination,97,98 disinhibited motor activity,96,98,99 impaired balance,97 an excess of left-sided dysfunction,96,98,99 and extrapyramidal motor findings.7,101 Difficulties with motor control and with presumably right-hemisphere tasks are fairly consistent findings in this body of work. The diagnostic specificity of these findings to OCD remains unclear.97 More NEA are seen in posttraumatic stress disorder patients102 than in control subjects, with significantly greater abnormality in motor sequencing and the palmomental reflex. Social phobia patients had marginally more NEA than normal control subjects in a small study.103 Further work is needed to address the specificity of these findings to anxiety disorders generally and to specific anxiety disorders, while considering the possible effects of state anxiety and medication.
Treatment Selection and Prognosis
To the extent that they are static or trait-like, NEA might be expected to predict such aspects of psychopathology as illness onset, outcome, and complications of treatment. These are areas in which the neurologic exam has clear potential for complementing clinical assessment of psychiatric patients. These areas of clinical utility are represented in the last two columns of Table 2.
Onset Prediction:
Follow-up of subsamples from the National Collaborative Perinatal Project found that NEA at age seven, particularly motor abnormalities, predict depression,14,104 anxiety,14,104 and delinquency105 in adolescence and also predict criminality105 and perhaps anxiety106 in adulthood. Motor dysfunction and general neurological impairment in preadolescence predicted psychiatric morbidity in the New York schizophrenia high-risk project.107 Children with motor impairments are more likely to develop schizophrenia by adulthood,108–110 and sensory deficits may also enhance vulnerability to psychosis in youth111 as well as in old age.112 In elderly persons, extrapyramidal findings may predict the onset of dementia.113
Outcome Prediction:
Neurologic findings with possible prognostic value in Alzheimer's disease include extrapyramidal signs,114–116 myoclonus,114,117 parietal signs,114,117–119 and primitive reflexes.115 In schizophrenia and mood disorders, NEA at baseline may not predict short-term amelioration of psychiatric symptoms.33,53,89,120 However, negative symptoms persisting after treatment with conventional antipsychotic medication were predicted by baseline NEA.40 Long-term global outcome in schizophrenia was also anticipated by NEA, including motor sequencing and extrapyramidal dysfunction.83,121,122 Stable, medicated bipolar patients with neurologic findings were more likely to relapse during follow-up.123 NEA predicted a poor response to medication in one of two studies of obsessive-compulsive disorder.124,125 Thus, neurologic signs may have prognostic importance in a variety of psychiatric contexts, with implications for treatment selection.
Predictions of Treatment Complications:
Although NEA might predict neurologic side effects from a variety of psychiatric medications, the only data known to us pertain to typical antipsychotic agents. Tardive dyskinesia, noted to coincide with motor and sensory findings and primitive reflexes,126–128 may also be predicted by such findings: withdrawal-emergent dyskinesia was predicted by the number of NEA in one study.26 Low blink rate129 and other parkinsonian signs83 predict parkinsonism after treatment with conventional antipsychotic drugs. Baseline neurological data may help to inform choices regarding antipsychotics and prophylactic antiparkinsonian agents.
CONCLUSIONS
Psychiatry is progressively informed by the brain sciences, but it is constrained in applying this knowledge to the clinical assessment of the individual patient by the high cost of the technologies applied in neuropsychiatric research. The neurologic examination is inexpensive and available to all physicians, and thus it has the potential to bridge the gulf between neurobiologic research and clinical practice. It has shown promise as an aid in differential diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment selection in a variety of psychiatric conditions.
The neurologic examination also has important limitations. It offers only indirect reflections of the salient properties of the brain, and it is presumably inferior to such approaches as functional imaging and histopathology in characterizing specific neural systems or in elucidating the neurobiologic bases of psychiatric disorders. Some may thus find it less intellectually exciting than many other techniques, and its utility may lie in more immediately clinical questions. A second limitation is that an extended neurologic exam requires time to complete. Clinicians tend to avoid devoting time to evaluative activities that shed only ambiguous light on the case at hand and thus may be reluctant to perform entire exam schedules routinely. Any extension beyond the traditional cursory “rule out” examination will be adopted only to the extent that it has clear implications for patient care. The limitations on reliability, although neither trivial nor entirely determined (especially in the case of test-retest reliability), appear to be comparable to those of the conventional neurologic exam.
Establishing efficient applications of the neurologic exam for specific clinical questions will require considerable refinement of the knowledge base. As Table 2 illustrates, many potential clinical applications have been investigated insufficiently, if at all.
First, it must be clearly established, for a given clinical population, which examination items are frequently enough abnormal to be of interest and can be readily assessed with adequate interrater reliability. Batteries must be developed that are limited to such items.
The reliability and validity of individual and aggregate neurologic tests should be assessed as methodically as are neuropsychological tests. These tests will require further validation against other measures, particularly those measuring regional brain function, so that we may better understand the nature of the abnormalities and explore the possibility that these tests offer more efficient alternative routes to similar information yielded by these less accessible methods.
We need comprehensive developmental and normative assessments of such examinations, especially before they are otherwise used in studies involving elderly subjects. The exams should be applied to large samples of diagnostically heterogeneous patients to clarify their value in differential diagnosis; to longitudinal studies to clarify their value in prognosis; and to therapeutic trials to clarify their value in treatment selection. The current tendency toward descriptive studies will have to give way to the testing of more specific hypotheses.
Much of the promise of the extended neurological examination lies in its heterogeneity. Its numerous elements individually have potential utility that may well be lost when they are combined into summary indices of “soft signs” or “neuromotor dysfunction.” Their potential may be realized only through item-by-item analyses. This approach is more feasible if these measures are continuous, rather than categorical or ordinal. Combinations of items should be empirically rather than intuitively determined; this might be done through a quantitative distillation such as factor analysis.
Bringing neurobiological knowledge to bear on clinical psychiatry is a task that can differ conceptually and methodologically from the more vigorously pursued task of uncovering the neurobiological bases of psychiatric disorders.130 If pursued with comparable fervor to that aroused by the more fundamental questions, such work could have a substantial impact on the practice of clinical psychiatry. The neurological examination offers promising avenues for the reintegration of neurobiology into psychiatric assessment.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank Joseph Pierri, M.D., for his comments on this manuscript, Melissa Knox for library assistance, and Tamera McLaughlin for secretarial support. This work was supported in part by National Institute of Mental Health Grants MH45203, MH01180, and MH45156 (M.S.K.) and was previously presented at the Society of Biological Psychiatry annual meeting, San Diego, CA, May 15–18, 1997.
References
1.
Maudsley H: Body and Mind: An Inquiry Into Their Connection and Mutual Influence, Especially in Reference to Mental Disorders. New York, Appleton, 1874
2.
Charcot JM: Clinical Lectures on Certain Diseases of the Nervous System. Detroit, MI, GS Davis, 1888
3.
Kraepelin E: Dementia Praecox and Paraphrenia. Huntington, NY, Krieger, 1919
4.
Bleuler E: Dementia Praecox or the Group of Schizophrenias. New York, International Universities Press, 1911
5.
Kraepelin E: Manic-Depressive Insanity and Paranoia. New York, Arno, 1921
6.
Stoddart WHB: Mind and Its Disorders: A Textbook for Students and Practitioners of Medicine, 5th edition. London, Lewis and Co, 1926
7.
Schilder P: The organic background of obsessions and compulsions. Am J Psychiatry 1938; 94:1397–1416
8.
Bender L, Fink N, Green M: Childhood schizophrenia: clinical study of 100 schizophrenic children. Am J Orthopsychiatry 1947; 17:40–56
9.
Clements SD, Peters J: Minimal brain dysfunction in the school-age child. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1962; 6:185–197
10.
Rutter M, Graham P, Yule W: A neuropsychiatric study in childhood (monograph). Clin Dev Med 1970; 35–36:1–272
11.
Nichols PL, Chen TC: Minimal Brain Dysfunction: A Prospective Study. Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum, 1981
12.
Tupper DE: Soft Neurological Signs. New York, Grune and Stratton, 1987
13.
Shafer SQ, Shaffer D, O'Connor PA, et al: Hard thoughts on neurological “soft signs,” in Developmental Neuropsychiatry, edited by Rutter M. New York, Guilford, 1983, pp 133–143
14.
Shaffer D, O'Connor PA, Shafer S, et al: Neurological “soft signs”: their origins and significance for behavior, in Developmental Neuropsychiatry, edited by Rutter M. New York, Guilford, 1983, pp 144–163
15.
Neeper R, Greenwood RS: On the psychiatric importance of neurological soft signs, in Advances in Clinical Child Psychology, vol 10, edited by Lahey BB, Kazdin AE. New York, Plenum, 1987, pp 217–258
16.
Kennard M: The value of equivocal signs in neurological diagnosis. Neurology 1960; 10:753–764
17.
Hertzig ME, Birch HG: Neurologic organization in psychiatrically disturbed adolescent girls. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1966; 15:590–598
18.
Rochford JM, Detre T, Tucker GJ, et al: Neuropsychological impairments in functional psychiatric diseases. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1970; 22:114–119
19.
Mosher LR, Pollin W, Stabenau JR: Identical twins discordant for schizophrenia: neurologic findings. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1971; 24:422–430
20.
American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Association, 1994
21.
Lipton AA, Cancro R: Schizophrenia: clinical features, in Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, 6th edition, edited by Kaplan HI, Sadock BJ. Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins, 1995,pp 968–987
22.
Taylor HG: The meaning and value of soft signs in the behavioral sciences, in Soft Neurological Signs, edited by Tupper DE. New York, Grune and Stratton, 1987, pp 297–335
23.
Ingram TTS: Soft signs. Dev Med Child Neurol 1973; 15:527–529
24.
King HE: Psychomotor Aspects of Mental Disease. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1954
25.
Cox SM, Ludwig AM: Neurological soft signs and psychopathology: incidence in diagnostic groups. Can J Psychiatry 1979; 24:668–673
26.
Schultz SK, Miller DD, Arndt S: Withdrawal-emergent dyskinesia in patients with schizophrenia during antipsychotic discontinuation. Biol Psychiatry 1995; 38:713–719
27.
Gupta S, Andreasen NC, Arndt S, et al: Neurological soft signs in neuroleptic-naive and neuroleptic-treated schizophrenic patients and in normal comparison subjects. Am J Psychiatry 1995; 152:191–196
28.
Guenther W, Guenther R, Eich FX, et al: Psychomotor disturbances in psychiatric patients as a possible basis for new attempts at differential diagnosis and therapy, II: cross validation study on schizophrenic patients: persistence of a “psychotic motor syndrome” as possible evidence of an independent biological marker syndrome for schizophrenia. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 1986; 235:301–308
29.
Guenther W, Guenther R, Streck P, et al: Psychomotor disturbances in psychiatric patients as a possible basis for new attempts at differential diagnosis and therapy, III: cross validation study on depressed patients: the psychotic motor syndrome as a possible state marker for endogenous depression. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 1988; 224:65–73
30.
Denckla MB: Revised PANESS. Psychopharmacol Bull 1985; 21:773–800
31.
Hertzig ME: Neurologic Evaluation Schedule, in Soft Neurological Signs, edited by Tupper DE. New York, Grune and Stratton, 1987, pp 355–368
32.
Buchanan RW, Heinrichs DW: The Neurological Evaluation Scale (NES): a structured instrument for the assessment of neurological signs in schizophrenia. Psychiatry Res 1989; 27:335–350
33.
Heinrichs DW, Buchanan RW: Significance and meaning of neurological signs in schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 1988; 145:11–18
34.
Karper L, Grillon C, Lysaker P, et al: Soft signs, attention, and startle in schizophrenia (abstract), in New Research Abstracts. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Association, 1994, p 358
35.
Sanders RD, Keshavan MS, Schooler NR: Neurologic exam abnormalities in first-break, neuroleptic-naive schizophrenia: preliminary results. Am J Psychiatry 1994; 151:1231–1233
36.
Sanders RD, Forman SD, Pierri JN, et al: Interrater reliability of the Neurological Examination in Schizophrenia. Schizophr Res 1998; 29:287–292
37.
Sanders RD, Forman SD, Gupta B, et al: Factor structure of the Neurological Evaluation Scale (abstract). Biol Psychiatry 1995; 37:680
38.
Sanders RD, Forman SD, Keshavan MS, et al: Test-retest stability of the neurologic examination in schizophrenia (abstract). Biol Psychiatry 1996; 39:548
39.
Schlenker R, Cohen R, Berg P, et al: Smooth-pursuit eye movement dysfunction in schizophrenia: the role of attention and general psychomotor dysfunction. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 1994; 244:153–160
40.
Convit A, Volavka J, Czobor P, et al: Effect of subtle neurological dysfunction on response to haloperidol treatment in schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 1994; 151:49–56
41.
Chen EYH, Shapleske J, Luque R, et al: The Cambridge Neurological Inventory: a clinical instrument for assessment of soft neurological signs in psychiatric patients. Psychiatry Res 1995; 56:183–204
42.
Vreeling FW, Jolles S, Verhey FRJ, et al: Primitive reflexes in healthy, adult volunteers and neurological patients: methodological issues. J Neurol 1993; 240:495–504
43.
Streiner DL: Learning how to differ: agreement and reliability statistics in psychiatry. Can J Psychiatry 1995; 40:60–66
44.
Kuzma JW, Tourtelotte WW, Remington RD: Quantitative clinical neurological testing, II: some statistical considerations of a battery of tests. Journal of Chronic Diseases 1965; 18:303–311
45.
Stokman C, Shafer SQ, Shaffer D, et al: Assessment of neurological “soft signs” in adolescents: reliability studies. Dev Med Child Neurol 1986; 28:428–439
46.
Mayo NE, Sullivan SJ, Swaine B: Observer variation in assessing neurophysical signs among patients with head injuries. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1991; 3:118–123
47.
Richards M, Marder K, Bell K, et al: Interrater reliability of extrapyramidal signs in a group assessed for dementia. Arch Neurol 1991; 48:1147–1149
48.
Sisk C, Ziegler DK, Zileli T: The discrepancies in recorded results from duplicate neurological history and examination in patients studied for prognosis in cerebrovascular disease. Stroke 1970; 1:14–18
49.
Shinar D, Gross CR, Mohr JP, et al: Interobserver variability in the assessment of neurologic history and examination in the Stroke Data Bank. Arch Neurol 1985; 42:557–565
50.
Hansen M, Sindrup SH, Christensen PB, et al: Interobserver variation in the evaluation of neurological signs: observer dependent factors. Acta Neurol Scand 1994; 90:145–149
51.
Schroder J, Niethammer R, Geider FJ, et al: Neurological soft signs in schizophrenia. Schizophr Res 1992; 6:25–30
52.
Bulbena A, Berrios GE: Cognitive function in the affective disorders: a prospective study. Psychopathology 1993; 26:6–12
53.
Duncan E, Sanfilipo N, Wieland S, et al: Neurological soft signs in schizophrenia: relationship to thought disorder (abstract). Biol Psychiatry 1994; 35:715
54.
Quitkin F, Rifkin A, Klein DF: Neurologic soft signs in schizophrenia and character disorders. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1976; 33:845–853
55.
Buchanan RW, Koeppl P, Breier A: Stability of neurological signs with clozapine treatment. Biol Psychiatry 1994; 36:198–200
56.
Rubin P, Vorstrup S, Hemmingsen R, et al: Neurological abnormalities in patients with schizophrenia or schizophreniform disorder at first admission to hospital: correlations with computerized tomography and regional cerebral blood flow findings. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1994; 90:385–390
57.
Faber A, Costello R, Mitzel H, et al: Dimensionality of a neuropsychiatric soft sign battery (abstract). Schizophr Res 1991; 5:382–383
58.
Malla AK, Norman RMG, Aguilar O, et al: Relationship between neurological “soft signs” and syndromes of schizophrenia. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1997; 96:274–280.
59.
Levy DL, Holzman PS, Matthysse S, et al: Eye-tracking dysfunction and schizophrenia: a critical perspective. Schizophr Bull 1993; 19:461–536
60.
Amador XF, Malaspina D, Sackeim HA, et al: Visual fixation and smooth pursuit eye movement abnormalities in patients with schizophrenia and their relatives. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 1995; 7:197–206
61.
Caligiuri MP, Lohr JB, Jeste DV: Parkinsonism in neuroleptic-naive schizophrenic patients. Am J Psychiatry 1993; 150:1343–1348
62.
Kleu G: The palmomental reflex in psychiatry. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1971; 47:230–236
63.
Davies RK, Neil JF, Himmelhoch JM: Cerebral dysrhythmias in schizophrenics receiving phenothiazines: clinical correlates. Clin Electroencephalogr 1975; 6:103–115
64.
Monroe R, Hulfish B: Neurologic abnormalities in prison subjects, in Brain Dysfunction in Aggressive Criminals, edited by Monroe RR. Lexington, MA, Lexington Books, 1978, pp 141–147
65.
Woods BT, Short MP: Neurological dimensions of psychiatry. Biol Psychiatry 1985; 20:192–198
66.
Siever LJ, Coursey RD, Alterman IS, et al: Psychological and physiological correlates of variations in smooth pursuit eye movements, in Biological Markers in Psychiatry and Neurology, edited by Usdin E, Hanin I. New York, Pergamon, 1982, pp 359–370
67.
Siever LJ, Coursey RD, Alterman IS, et al: Clinical, psychophysiological, and neurological characteristics of volunteers with impaired smooth pursuit eye movements. Biol Psychiatry 1989; 26:35–51
68.
Baker RW, Schooler NR, Shah AN, et al: Association of clinical variables with SPECT findings in schizophrenia (abstract). Schizophr Res 1993; 7:192
69.
Guenther W, Giunta R, Klages U, et al: Findings of electroencephalographic brain mapping in mild to moderate dementia of the Alzheimer type during resting, motor, and music-perception conditions. Psychiatry Res 1993; 50:163–176
70.
Guenther W, Brodie JD, Bartlett EJ, et al: Diminished cerebral metabolic response to motor stimulation in schizophrenics: a PET study. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 1994; 244:115–125
71.
Schroder J, Wenz F, Schad LR, et al: Sensorimotor cortex and supplementary motor area changes in schizophrenia: a study with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Psychiatry 1995; 167:197–201
72.
Franssen EH, Reisberg B, Kluger A, et al: Cognition-independent neurologic symptoms in normal aging and probable Alzheimer's disease. Arch Neurol 1991; 48:148–154
73.
Funkenstein HH, Albert MS, Cook NR, et al: Extrapyramidal signs and other neurologic findings in clinically diagnosed Alzheimer's disease: a community-based study. Arch Neurol 1993; 50:51–56
74.
Gilleard CJ, Kellett JM, Coles JA, et al: The St. George's dementia bed investigation study: cardiovascular, neurological and neuropsychological correlates. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1993; 87:273–278
75.
Roman GC, Tatemichi TK, Erkinjuntti T, et al: Vascular dementia: diagnostic criteria for research studies. Report of the NINDS-AIREN International Workshop. Neurology 1993; 43:250–260
76.
Forstl H, Burns A, Luthert P, et al: The Lewy-body variant of Alzheimer's disease: clinical and pathological findings. Br J Psychiatry 1993; 162:385–392
77.
Osuntokun BO, Hendrie HC, Fisher K, et al: The diagnosis of dementia associated with alcoholism: a preliminary report of new approach. West Afr J Med 1994; 13:160–163
78.
Sanson TA, Price BH: Diagnostic testing and dementia. Neurol Clin 1996; 14:45–59
79.
Benesch CG, McDaniel KD, Cox C, et al: End-stage Alzheimer's disease: Glasgow Coma Scale and the neurologic examination. Arch Neurol 1993; 50:1309–1315
80.
Bell IR, Amend D, Kaszniak AW, et al: Memory deficits, sensory impairment, and depression in the elderly (letter). Lancet 1993; 341:62
81.
Bakchine S, Lacomblez L, Palisson E, et al: Relationship between primitive reflexes, extrapyramidal signs, and reflective apraxia and severity of cognitive impairment in dementia of the Alzheimer type. Acta Neurol Scand 1989; 79:38–46
82.
Cadet JL, Rickler KC, Weinberger DL: The clinical neurologic examination in schizophrenia, in The Neurology of Schizophrenia, edited by Nasrallah H, Weinberger D. New York, Elsevier, 1986, pp 1–47
83.
Chatterjee A, Chakos M, Koreen A, et al: Prevalence and clinical correlates of extrapyramidal signs and spontaneous dyskinesia in never-medicated schizophrenic patients. Am J Psychiatry 1995; 152:1724–1729
84.
Tucker GJ, Silverfarb PM: Neurologic dysfunction in schizophrenia: significance for diagnostic practice, in Psychiatric Diagnosis: Exploration of Biological Predictors, edited by Akiskal HS, Webb WL. New York, Spectrum, 1978, pp 453–462
85.
Woods BT, Kinney DIC, Yurgelun-Todd D: Neurologic abnormalities in schizophrenic patients and their families, I: comparison of schizophrenic, bipolar and substance abuse patients and normal controls. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1986; 43:657–663
86.
Walker E, Shaye J: Familial schizophrenia: a predictor of neuromotor and attentional abnormalities in schizophrenia. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1982; 39:1153–1156
87.
Schwartz F, Carr A, Munich R, et al: Voluntary motor performance in psychotic disorders: a replication study. Psychol Rep 1990; 66:1223–1234
88.
Nasrallah HA, Tippin J, McCalley-Whitters M: Neurological soft signs in manic patients: a comparison with schizophrenic and control groups. J Affect Disord 1983; 5:45–50
89.
Cherian A, Kuruvilla K: Prevalance of neurological “soft signs” in affective disorder and their correlation with response to treatment. Indian Journal of Psychiatry 1989; 31:224–229
90.
Walker E: Attentional and neuromotor functions of schizophrenics, schizoaffectives and patients with other affective disorders. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1981; 38:1355–1358
91.
Manschreck TC, Ames D: Neurologic features and psychopathology in schizophrenic disorders. Biol Psychiatry 1984; 19:703–719
92.
Kinney DK, Yurgelun-Todd D, Woods BT: Neurological hard signs in schizophrenia and major mood disorders. J Nerv Ment Dis 1993; 181:202–203
93.
Gureje O: Neurological soft signs in Nigerian schizophrenics: a controlled study. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1988; 78:505–509
94.
Merello M, Sabe L, Teson A, et al: Extrapyramidalism in Alzheimer's disease: prevalence, psychiatric, and neuropsychological correlates. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994; 57:1503–1509
95.
Moffoot APR, O'Carroll RE, Bennie J, et al: Diurnal variation of mood and neuropsychological function in major depression with melancholia. J Affect Disord 1994; 32:257–269
96.
Denckla MB: Neurological examination, in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder in Children and Adolescents, edited by Rapoport JL. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Press, 1989, pp 107–115
97.
Conde López V, de la Gandara Martín JJ, Blanco Lozano ML, et al: Signos neurológicos menores en los trastornos obsesivo-compulsivos [Neurologic soft signs in obsessive-compulsive disorders]. Actas Luso Esp Neurol Psiquiatr Cienc Afines1990; 18:143–164
98.
Hollander E, Schiffman E, Cohen B, et al: Signs of central nervous system dysfunction in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1990; 47:27–32
99.
Bihari K, Pato MT, Hill JL, et al: Neurologic soft signs in obsessive-compulsive disorder (letter). Arch Gen Psychiatry 1991; 48:278–279
100.
Stein DJ, Hollander E, Simeon D, et al: Neurological soft signs in female trichotillomania patients, obsessive-compulsive disorder patients, and healthy control subjects. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 1994; 6:184–187
101.
Hymas N, Lees A, Bolton D, et al: The neurology of obsessional slowness. Brain 1991; 114:2203–2233
102.
Gurvits TV, Lasko NB, Schachter SC, et al: Neurological status of Vietnam veterans with chronic posttraumatic stress disorder. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 1993; 5:183–188
103.
Hollander E, Weiller F, Cohen L, et al: Neurological soft signs in social phobia. Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol 1996; 9:182–185
104.
Pine D, Shaffer D, Schonfeld IS: Persistent emotional disorder in children with neurological soft signs. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1993; 32:1229–1236
105.
Denno DW: Biology and Violence: From Birth to Adulthood. New York, Cambridge University Press, 1990
106.
Hollander E, DeCaria CM, Aronowitz B, et al: A pilot follow-up study of childhood soft signs and the development of adult psychopathology. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 1991; 3:186–189
107.
Erlenmeyer-Kimling L, Kestenbaum C, Bird H, et al: Assessment of the New York high-risk project subjects in sample A who are now clinically deviant, in Children at Risk for Schizophrenia: A Longitudinal Perspective, edited by Watt F, Wynne LC, Rolf JE. New York, Cambridge University Press, 1984, pp 227–239
108.
Fish B, Marcus J, Hans SL, et al: Infants at risk for schizophrenia: sequelae of a genetic neurointegrative defect. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1992; 49:221–235
109.
Jones P, Rodgers B, Murray R, et al: Child developmental risk factors for adult schizophrenia in the British 1946 birth cohort. Lancet 1994; 344:1398–1402
110.
Walker EF, Savoic T, Davis D: Neuromotor precursors of schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 1994; 20:441–451
111.
David AS, Maimberg A, Lewis G, et al: Are there neurological and sensory risk factors for schizophrenia? Schizophr Res 1995; 14:247–251
112.
Kay DWK, Roth M: Environmental and hereditary factors in the schizophrenias of old age (“late paraphrenia”) and their bearing on the general problem of causation in schizophrenia. J Ment Sci 1961; 107:649–686
113.
Richards M, Stern Y, Mayeux R: Subtle extrapyramidal signs can predict the development of dementia in elderly individuals. Neurology 1993; 43:2184–2188
114.
Mayeux R, Stern Y, Spanton S: Heterogeneity in dementia of the Alzheimer type: evidence of subgroups. Neurology 1985;35:453–461
115.
Burns A, Jacoby R, Levy R: Neurological signs in Alzheimer's disease. Age Ageing 1991; 20:45–51
116.
Stern Y, Liu X, Albert M, et al: Modeling the influence of extrapyramidal signs on the progression of Alzheimer's disease. Arch Neurol 1996; 53:1121–1126
117.
Chui HC, Teng EL, Henderson VW, et al: Clinical subtypes of dementia of the Alzheimer type. Neurology 1985; 35:1544–1550
118.
Gilleard CJ, Spain E, O'Carroll RE: Senile dementia and parietal lobe dysfunction. Br J Psychiatry 1987; 150:114–117
119.
O' Carroll RE, Whittick S, Baikie E: Parietal signs and sinister prognosis in dementia: a four-year follow-up study. Br J Psychiatry 1991; 158:358–361
120.
Bartko G, Frecska E, Zador G, et al: Neurological features, cognitive impairment and neuroleptic response in schizophrenic patients. Schizophr Res 1989; 2:311–313
121.
Johnstone EC, Macmillan JF, Frith CD, et al: Further investigation of the predictors of outcome following first schizophrenic episodes. Br J Psychiatry 1990; 157:182–189
122.
Vaid G, Smith RC, Rosenberger S, et al: Neurological and neuropsychological tests in schizophrenics (abstract). Biol Psychiatry 1993; 33:92A
123.
Mukherjee S, Shukla S, Rosen A: Neurological abnormalities in patients with bipolar disorder. Biol Psychiatry 1984; 19:337–345
124.
Hollander E, Decaria CM, Sanoud J, et al: Neurologic soft signs in obsessive-compulsive disorder (reply). Arch Gen Psychiatry 1991; 48:278–279
125.
Thienemann N, Koran LM: Do soft signs predict treatment outcome in obsessive-compulsive disorder? J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 1995; 7:218–222
126.
Wegner JT, Catalano R, Gibralter S, et al: Schizophrenics with tardive dyskinesia: neuropsychological deficit and family psychopathology. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1985; 42:860–865
127.
Manschreck TC: Motor and cognitive disturbances in schizophrenic disorders, in Schizophrenia: Scientific Progress, edited by Schulz SC, Tamminga CA. New York, Oxford University Press, 1989, pp 372–380
128.
Waddington JL, Youssef HA, King DJ, et al: Association of cognitive dysfunction, altered brain morphology, and release of developmental reflexes with tardive dyskinesia in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, in Schizophrenia: Scientific Progress, edited by Schulz SC, Tamminga CA. New York Oxford University Press, 1989, pp 396–403
129.
Keshavan MS, Narasimha RIVL, Narayanan HS: Rate of blinking may predict neuroleptic-induced parkinsonism (letter). Br J Psychiatry 1983; 142:423
130.
Luchins DJ: How about something practical? Biol Psychiatry 1991; 30:1179–1181
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Published online: 1 November 1998
Published in print: November 1998
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Export Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.
There are no citations for this item
View Options
View options
PDF/ePub
View PDF/ePubGet Access
Login options
Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.
Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens loginNot a subscriber?
PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.
Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).