Johnny Collett1,2, Marloes Franssen1,3, Charlotte Winward4, Hooshang Izadi1,5, Andy Meaney1, Wala Mahmoud1, Marko Bogdanovic6, Martin Tims1, Derick Wade1,7, Helen Dawes1,8. 1. 1 Movement Science Group, OxINMAHR, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK. 2. 2 Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK. 3. 3 Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 4. 4 Department of Infectious Diseases, Churchill Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, UK. 5. 5 Department of Mechanical Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK. 6. 6 Department of Neurology, Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading, UK. 7. 7 Oxford Centre for Enablement, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, UK. 8. 8 Department of Clinical Neurology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report on the control group of a trial primarily designed to investigate exercise for improving mobility in people with Parkinson's disease (pwP). The control group undertook a handwriting intervention to control for attention and time spent practising a specific activity. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a two-arm parallel phase II randomized controlled trial with blind assessment. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: PwP able to walk ⩾100 m and with no contraindication to exercise were recruited from the Thames Valley, UK, and randomized (1:1) to exercise or handwriting, via a concealed computer-generated list. INTERVENTION: Handwriting was undertaken at home and exercise in community facilities; both were delivered through workbooks with monthly support visits and involved practice for 1 hour, twice weekly, over a period of six months. MAIN MEASURES: Handwriting was assessed, at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months, using a pangram giving writing speed, amplitude (area) and progressive reduction in amplitude (ratio). The Movement Disorder Society (MDS)-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) item 2.7 measured self-reported handwriting deficits. RESULTS: In all, 105 pwP were recruited (analysed: n = 51 handwriting, n = 54 exercise). A total of 40 pwP adhered to the handwriting programme, most completing ⩾1 session/week. Moderate effects were found for amplitude (total area: d = 0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.11 to 0.7; P = 0.13) in favour of handwriting over a period of12 months; effects for writing speed and ratio parameters were small ≤0.11. Self-reported handwriting difficulties also favoured handwriting (UPDRS 2.7: odds ratio (OR) = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.91; P = 0.02). No adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSION: PwP generally adhere to self-directed home handwriting which may provide benefit with minimal risk. Encouraging effects were found in writing amplitude and, moreover, perceived ability.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To report on the control group of a trial primarily designed to investigate exercise for improving mobility in people with Parkinson's disease (pwP). The control group undertook a handwriting intervention to control for attention and time spent practising a specific activity. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a two-arm parallel phase II randomized controlled trial with blind assessment. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: PwP able to walk ⩾100 m and with no contraindication to exercise were recruited from the Thames Valley, UK, and randomized (1:1) to exercise or handwriting, via a concealed computer-generated list. INTERVENTION: Handwriting was undertaken at home and exercise in community facilities; both were delivered through workbooks with monthly support visits and involved practice for 1 hour, twice weekly, over a period of six months. MAIN MEASURES: Handwriting was assessed, at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months, using a pangram giving writing speed, amplitude (area) and progressive reduction in amplitude (ratio). The Movement Disorder Society (MDS)-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) item 2.7 measured self-reported handwriting deficits. RESULTS: In all, 105 pwP were recruited (analysed: n = 51 handwriting, n = 54 exercise). A total of 40 pwP adhered to the handwriting programme, most completing ⩾1 session/week. Moderate effects were found for amplitude (total area: d = 0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.11 to 0.7; P = 0.13) in favour of handwriting over a period of12 months; effects for writing speed and ratio parameters were small ≤0.11. Self-reported handwriting difficulties also favoured handwriting (UPDRS 2.7: odds ratio (OR) = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.91; P = 0.02). No adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSION: PwP generally adhere to self-directed home handwriting which may provide benefit with minimal risk. Encouraging effects were found in writing amplitude and, moreover, perceived ability.
Entities:
Keywords:
Parkinson’s disease; handwriting; micrographia; motor symptoms; randomized controlled trial
Authors: Jacqueline A Osborne; Rachel Botkin; Cristina Colon-Semenza; Tamara R DeAngelis; Oscar G Gallardo; Heidi Kosakowski; Justin Martello; Sujata Pradhan; Miriam Rafferty; Janet L Readinger; Abigail L Whitt; Terry D Ellis Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2022-04-01
Authors: Evelien Nackaerts; Sanne Broeder; Marcelo P Pereira; Stephan P Swinnen; Wim Vandenberghe; Alice Nieuwboer; Elke Heremans Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-12-22 Impact factor: 3.240