The event-related potential and motor reaction time were simultaneously recorded in 35 patients with Parkinson's disease (26 nondemented and nine demented) and 15 age-matched neurologically normal control subjects during the performance of visual discrimination tasks. There were no significant differences in either the latency or amplitude of the P300 component between the nondemented patients and the control subjects, but the patients with nondemented Parkinson's disease had a significantly prolonged reaction time compared with the controls. In patients with demented Parkinson's disease, both P300 latency and reaction time were significantly prolonged compared with the normal controls.
These results suggest that response selection and execution are impaired in patients with nondemented Parkinson's disease, although the stimulus evaluation process is largely preserved, whereas patients with demented Parkinson's disease have impairment of stimulus evaluation, go/no-go response selection, and execution.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Helkala EL, Laulumaa V, Soininen H, et al: Recall and recognition memory in patients with Alzheimer's and Parkinson's Disease. Ann Neurol1988; 24:214–217.
2.
2. Girotti F, Soliveri P, Carella F, Geminiani G, et al: Role of motor performance in cognitive processes of parkinsonian patients. Neurology1988; 38:537–541.
4. Levin BE, Llabre MM, Weiner WJ: Cognitive impairments associated with early Parkinson's disease. Neurology1989; 39:557–561.
5.
5. Loranger AW, Goodel H, McDowell FH, et al: Intellectual impairment in Parkinson's syndrome. Brain1972; 95:405–412.
6.
6. Marsden CD: The mysterious motor function of the basal ganglia: The Robert Wartenberg Lecture. Neurology1982; 32: 514–539.
7.
7. Evarts EV, Teravainen H, Calne DB: Reaction time in Parkinson's disease. Brain1981; 104:167–186.
8.
8. Stelmach GE, Worringham CJ, Stard EA: Movement preparation in Parkinson's disease. Brain1986; 109:1179–1194.
9.
9. Pullman SL, Watts RL, Juncos JL, et al: Movement amplitude choice reaction time performance in Parkinson's disease may be independent of dopaminergic status. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1990; 53:279–283.
10.
10. Pfefferbaum A, Wenegrat BG: Clinical application of the P300 component of event related potentials. II: Dementia, depression and schizophrenia. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol1984; 59:104–124.
11.
11. McCarthy G, Donchin E: A metric for thought: A comparison of P300 latency and reaction time. Science1981; 211:77–80.
12.
12. McCarthy G, Donchin E: Chronometric analysis of human information processing, in Gaillard AWH, Ritter W (eds): Tutorials in ERP Research: Endogenous Components. Amsterdam, Elsevier, 1983, pp 251–268.
13.
13. Kutas M, McCarthy G: Augmenting mental chronometry: The P300 as a measure of stimulus evaluation time. Science1977; 197:792–795.
15. Hansch EC, Syndulko K, Cohen SN, et al: Cognition in Parkinson's disease: An event-related potential perspective. Ann Neurol1982; 11:599–607.
16.
16. O'Donnell BF, Squires NK: Evoked potential changes and neuropsychological performance in Parkinson's disease. Biol Psychiatry1987; 24:23–37.
17.
17. Yamada T, Katayama K, Hirayama K: Neuropsychological disturbance in Parkinson's disease—By the analysis of new modified Wisconsin card sorting test and of P300 component evoked by auditory stimuli. Brain Nerve1987; 39:643–647.
18.
18. Squires NK, Ollo C: Human evoked potential techniques: Possible application to neuropsychology, in Hanny HJ (ed): Experimental Techniques in Human Neuropsychology. New York, Oxford University Press, 1986, pp 386–418.
19.
19. Starkstein SE, Esteguy M, Berthier ML, et al: Evoked potentials, reaction time and cognitive performance in on and off phase of Parkinson's disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1989; 52:338–340.
20.
20. Prasher D, Findly L: Dopaminergic induced changes in cognitive and motor processing in Parkinson's disease: An electrophysiological investigation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1991; 54:603–609.
21.
21. Hasegawa K: The clinical assessment of dementia in the aged: A dementia screening scale for psychogeriatric patients, in Bergener M, Lehr U, Lang E, et al (eds): Aging in the Eighties and Beyond. New York, Springer, 1983, pp 207–218.
22.
22. Ito J: Auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) in healthy subjects and patients with dementia. Jpn J Clin Pathol1991; 39:859–864.
23.
23. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR: Mini-Mental State: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinicians. J Psychiatr Res1975; 12:189–198.
24.
24. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed, rev.Washington DC, American Psychiatric Association, 1987, pp 103–107.
25.
25. Hoehn MM, Yahr MD: Parkinsonism: Onset, progression and mortality. Neurology1967; 17:427–442.
26.
26. Wallenstein S, Zucker CL, Fleiss JL: Some statistical methods useful in circulation research. Circ Res1980; 47:1–9.
27.
27. Pritchard WS: Psychophysiology of P300. Psychol Bull1981; 89:506–540.
28.
28. Hoffman JE: Event-related potentials and automatic and controlled process, in Rohrbaugh JW, Parasuraman R, Johnson R Jr (eds): Event-Related Brain Potentials: Basic Issues and Applications. New York, Oxford University Press, 1990, pp 145–157.
30. Higasa C, Nakashima K, Nishikawa S, et al: Event-related potential in Parkinson's disease. Rinsho Shinkeigaku1987; 27:893–897.
31.
31. Goodin DS, Aminoff MJ: Electrophysiological differences between subtypes of dementia. Brain1986; 109:1103–1113.
32.
32. Patterson JV, Michalewski HJ, Starr A: Latency variability of the components of auditory event-related potentials to infrequent stimuli in aging, Alzheimer-type dementia, and depression. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol1988; 71:450–460.
