| Literature DB >> 24877117 |
Matthis Synofzik1, Winfried Ilg2.
Abstract
The cerebellum is essentially involved in movement control and plays a critical role in motor learning. It has remained controversial whether patients with degenerative cerebellar disease benefit from high-intensity coordinative training. Moreover, it remains unclear by which training methods and mechanisms these patients might improve their motor performance. Here, we review evidence from different high-intensity training studies in patients with degenerative spinocerebellar disease. These studies demonstrate that high-intensity coordinative training might lead to a significant benefit in patients with degenerative ataxia. This training might be based either on physiotherapy or on whole-body controlled videogames ("exergames"). The benefit shown in these studies is equal to regaining one or more years of natural disease progression. In addition, first case studies indicate that even subjects with advanced neurodegeneration might benefit from such training programs. For both types of training, the observed clinical improvements are paralleled by recoveries in ataxia-specific dysfunctions (e.g., multijoint coordination and dynamic stability). Importantly, for both types of training, the retention of the effects seems to depend on the frequency and continuity of training. Based on these studies, we here present preliminary recommendations for clinical practice, and articulate open questions that might guide future studies on neurorehabilitation in degenerative spinocerebellar disease.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24877117 PMCID: PMC4022207 DOI: 10.1155/2014/583507
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Overview of high-intensity training studies in degenerative ataxia.
| Physiotherapy combined with occupational therapy [ | Coordinative Physiotherapy [ | Exergames training [ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of patients | 42 | 16 | 10 |
|
| |||
| Type of disease | SCA6 (20), ADCA (6), and IDCA (16) | SCA6 (2), SCA2 (1), ADCA (1), IDCA (6), FRDA (3), SANDO (2),and SN (1) | FRDA (4), arCA (3), AOA2 (1), and ADCA (2) |
|
| |||
| Age ± SD (range) | 62.5 ± 8.0 (range: 40–82) | 61.4 ± 11.2 (range: 44–79) | 15.4 ± 3.5 (range: 11–20) |
|
| |||
| Gender | 22 males, 20 females | 8 males, 8 females | 5 males, 5 females |
|
| |||
| Duration of disease | 9.8 ± 6.2 (7 months–30 years) | 12.9 ± 7.8 (3–25 years) | |
|
| |||
| Baseline SARA | 11.3 ± 3.8 (5–21.5) | 15.8 ± 4.3 (11–24) | 10.9 ± 2.3 (7–13.5) |
|
| |||
| Control | Crossover for short-term effect | Intraindividual controls for short-term effect | Intraindividual controls |
|
| |||
| Evidence class | Class Ib | Class III evidence | Class III evidence |
|
| |||
| Intervention | 2 hours × 5 days + 1 hour × 2 days per week for 4 weeks | 1 hour, 3 days per week for 4 weeks | 1 hr × 4 per week for 2 weeks at lab; variable frequency at subjects' own motivation for 6 weeks at home |
|
| |||
| After training | No | Home-training protocols | No |
|
| |||
| Outcome measures | SARA, FIM, gait speed, cadence, FAC, and falls | SARA, gait speed, balance, BBS, GAS, and movement analysis | SARA, balance, ABC scale, DGI scale, GAS, and movement analysis |
|
| |||
| Assessment point | Baseline, post 0, 4, 12, and 24 weeks | 4 weeks pre, baseline, and post 0, 8 weeks | 2 weeks pre, baseline, and post 0 |
|
| |||
| Main results | SARA and gait improved 12 wks but not 24 wks | SARA and gait improved 8 wks after rehabilitation only in patients with cerebellar ataxia not afferent ataxia | SARA and gait improved directly post rehabilitation; improvement correlated with individual's training intensity at home |
SCA: spinocerebellar ataxia; FRDA: Friedreich's ataxia; IDCA: idiopathic cerebellar ataxia; ADCA: autosomal dominant cerebellar ataxia of unknown type; SANDO: sensory ataxic neuropathy with dysarthria and ophthalmoparesis caused by mutations in the polymerase gamma gene; SN: sensory neuropathy with cerebellar degeneration; arCA: autosomal recessive cerebellar ataxia of unknown type; AOA2: ataxia with oculomotor apraxia type 2; SARA: scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia; ABC: activity-specific balance confidence scale; BBS: Berg balance score; GAS: goal attainment scaling [42]; DGI: dynamic Gait index; FIM: functional independence measure [38]; and FAC: functional ambulation categories. Evidence was graded according to the Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM) classification. This table presents details of the first three clinical studies of motor rehabilitation in larger cohorts in degenerative spinocerebellar disease [34–36, 43].
Exercises of the coordinative physiotherapy program.
| Static Balance |
| (i) Standing on one leg. |
| (ii) Quadruped standing: stabilize the trunk and lift one arm. |
| (iii) Quadruped standing: stabilize the trunk and lift one leg. |
| (iv) Quadruped standing: lift one arm and the leg of the other side. |
| Dynamic Balance |
| (i) Kneeling: put one foot in front and back alternately. |
| (ii) Kneeling: put one foot to the side and back alternately. |
| (iii) Kneeling: put one foot in front, stand up, and put one leg back with kneeling alternately. |
| (iv) Standing: swing arms, see saw knees. |
| (v) Standing: step to the side. |
| (vi) Standing: step in front. |
| (vii) Standing: step back. |
| (viii) Standing: cross over step. |
| (ix) Climbing stairs. |
| (x) Walking over uneven ground. |
| Whole Body Movements to Train the Trunk-Limb Coordination |
| (i) Quadruped standing: lift one arm and the leg of the other side, flex arm, leg, and trunk, and extend arm, leg, and trunk alternately. |
| (ii) “Morning prayer” (Moshe Feldenkrais): kneeling: bend legs, arms, and trunk (“package sitting”): extend legs, arms, and trunk alternately. |
| (iii) Kneeling: sit beside the heel on the right side; kneeling: sit beside the hell on the left side alternately. |
| Steps to Prevent Falling and Falling Strategies In Order To Prevent Trauma |
| (i) Standing: step to the side, step in front, step back, and cross over step in a dynamic alteration. |
| (ii) Standing: the therapist pushes the patient in altered directions; the patient has to react quickly with fall preventing steps. |
| (iii) Standing: bend the trunk and the knees to touch the floor and erect the body alternately. |
| (iv) Standing: bend the trunk and the knees, touch the floor, and go down to quadruped standing, |
| (v) Standing: the therapist pushes the patient; the patient has to react quickly-bend and go to the floor in a controlled manner |
| (vi) Walking—the therapist pushes the patient—the patient has to react quickly, bend, and go to the floor in a controlled manner. |
| Movements to Treat or Prevent Contracture Especially Movements of Shoulders and Spine |
| (i) Extension of the spine: prone lying: push up the shoulder girdle from prone lying; prone lying on a wedge. |
| (ii) Rotation of the spine: supine lying: knees are bended, rotate the knees to the right and left side, |
| (iii) Flexion of the shoulder: supine lying: lift the arms in the direction of the head. |
Figure 1Coordinative physiotherapy. (a) Exemplary exercise of the training protocol: training of dynamic balance and multijoint coordination. (b) Group data of the clinical ataxia score SARA before training intervention (BT), after the four weeks training intervention (AT) and for follow-up assessment (F1J) after one year. Stars indicate significant differences between examinations (*P < 0.05). SARA: scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia ([35] reproduced with permission from Wiley).
Personally selected goal of the goal attainment score for an exemplary individual with degenerative cerebellar ataxia (subject C4).
| Individual goal: walking around a table with small distance without swaying | Score |
|---|---|
| The patient walks around the table mainly by touching the table | −2 |
| The patient can walk around the table without touching the table most of the time | −1 |
| The patient can walk around the table without touching the table | 0 |
| The patient can walk around the table without touching the table and he is able to look around sometimes | +1 |
| The patient can walk around the table without touching the table and he is able to look around the whole time | +2 |
Five levels of goal attainment were defined before the intervention started. Scores range from −2 to 2 (−2~baseline, −1~less than expected outcome, 0~expected outcome, 1~greater than expected outcome, and 2~much greater than expected outcome [35]).
Personally selected goals of the goal attainment scale and the scores obtained after the intervention period.
| Patient | Goal | Score |
|---|---|---|
| C1 | Walking on a narrow path (<50 cm) | 2 |
| C2 | Walking up a staircase without using railway | 2 |
| C3 | Reaching the mailbox in a distance of 600 without using a walking aid | 0 |
| C4 | Walking around a table with small distance without swaying | 1 |
| C5 | Walking without a walking aid over a distance >10 m | 1 |
| C6 | Walking over a distance of about 300 m without a walking aid or a helping person | 2 |
| C7 | Walking over a distance of 50 m with a trolley, without bumping with the feet into it | 1 |
| C8 | Walking free on a small staircase (3 steps) in an alternating way with a distance of 1 m to the railway | −1 |
| C9 | Walking with a trolley over a distance of 50 m | 0 |
| C10 | Walking without a walking aid over a distance of about 100 m | 0 |
| A1 | Walking independently over longer distances (>500 m) | 1 |
| A2 | Reducing danger of falling | 0 |
| A3 | Walking a distance of 30 m with a full cup without spilling something | −1 |
| A4 | Walking with a trolley over a distance of 2000 m without dropping feet and strong support from the arms. | −1 |
| A5 | Walking over a distance of 100 m with a trolley and without bumping with the feet into it | 2 |
| A6 | Walking with a trolley over a distance of 500 m | −1 |
Described goals correspond to score 0. Scores range from −2 to 2 (−2~baseline, −1~less than expected outcome, 0~expected outcome, 1~greater than expected outcome, and 2~much greater than expected outcome [35]).
Figure 2Exergame-based training. (a–c) Screenshots from the three XBOX Kinect games used in the training protocol. (a) 20000 leaks practice whole-body coordination and interaction with a dynamic environment; (b) table tennis practices goal-directed upper limb movements and dynamic balance, as well as movement timing; (c) light race practices goal-directed lower limb movements, fast movements, and dynamic balance. (d) Snapshot from the “Light Race” game. Patient C1 performs dynamic stepping movements in order to control the avatar to step onto the highlighted areas on the floor (figures reproduced with permission from Microsoft Xbox Kinect (a), (b) and Ubisoft (c), (d)). (e, f) Group comparisons of the clinical ataxia scores (SARA) and lateral sway in gait at examinations E1–E4. Patients were examined four times: two weeks before intervention (E1), immediately before the first training session (E2), after the two-week lab-training period (E3), and after the six-week home-training phase (E4) [43]. Stars denote significance: *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01.