Cited by 52Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlLong-Term Effects of COVID-19

Quantitative assessment of autonomic symptom burden in Postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS)

Rea, Natalie A., Campbell, Corey L., Cortez, Melissa M.·2017·Journal of the Neurological Sciences

Abstract

Postural tachycardia syndrome (PoTS) is a poorly understood disorder characterized by excessive tachycardia in the upright position. In addition, patients with PoTS often complain of non-postural symptoms, including fatigue, gastrointestinal and vasomotor fluctuations. The present study quantitatively assessed autonomic symptom burden in PoTS patients (n=32) using the COMPASS-31, compared to that of autonomic failure/neuropathy (AF/N; n=47) and asymptomatic, healthy controls (n=32). Using AIC model selection and regression analysis, we found differences in the contribution of individual COMPASS-31 domains, depending on the autonomic disorder. In PoTS, fatigue severity, orthostatic intolerance and pupillomotor symptom domains, contributed significantly to differences in COMPASS-31 scores compared to controls. In contrast, the secretomotor, gastrointestinal, bladder and vasomotor domains, contributed significantly to the AF/N model. Our results confirm an increase in autonomic symptoms across all functional domains in PoTS compared to controls, and with similar severity to AF/N, though with differing significant domain contributions. Our findings provide additional support that PoTS is indeed a syndrome of autonomic dysfunction beyond orthostatic intolerance, but also indicates the likelihood of disease-specific contributions to symptom burden, highlighting the need for application of expanded physiological assessment beyond orthostatic challenge, as well as disease-specific sy…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jns.2017.03.032

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rea, N. A., Campbell, C. L., & Cortez, M. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Utah (US)
  • Colorado State University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Rea, Natalie A.
  • Campbell, Corey L.
  • Cortez, Melissa M.
Venue
Journal of the Neurological Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-06
Volume
377
Pages
35-41
ISSN
0022-510X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2601173973
Cited by
52
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 8
FWCI
4.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the Neurological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (L32 MD009927)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
Keywords
postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, autonomic dysfunction, COMPASS-31, autonomic failure, orthostatic intolerance, fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, symptom assessment
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Autonomic Nervous System, Child, Fatigue, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pupil Disorders, Severity of Illness Index, Case-Control Studies, Orthostatic Intolerance, Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review