| Literature DB >> 31428302 |
Rodney Marsh1,2, Michael H Cole3, Nadeeka N W Dissanayaka4,5, Tiffany R Au4, Sandra Clewett6, John D O'Sullivan1,5, Peter A Silburn1,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The optimal prescription of cueing for the treatment of freezing of gait (FoG) in Parkinson's disease (PD) is currently a difficult problem for clinicians due to the heterogeneity of cueing modalities, devices, and the limited comparative trial evidence. There has been a rise in the development of motion-sensitive, wearable cueing devices for the treatment of FoG in PD. These devices generally produce cues after signature gait or electroencephalographic antecedents of FoG episodes are detected (phasic cues). It is not known whether these devices offer benefit over simple (tonic) cueing devices.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31428302 PMCID: PMC6681574 DOI: 10.1155/2019/2478980
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parkinsons Dis ISSN: 2042-0080
Patient characteristics.
| Mean (frequency) | SD (% sample) | |
|---|---|---|
| Age | 70.1 | 7.2 |
| Gender (male) | 15 | 75 |
| UPDRS-III | 36.4 | 13.5 |
| Falls Efficacy Scale | 34.8 | 12.8 |
| Freezing of Gait Questionnaire | 14.3 | 4.4 |
| Montreal Cognitive Assessment | 26.5 | 2.5 |
| Standardised Mini Mental State Examination | 28.4 | 1.2 |
Figure 1Schematic drawing of the 33-metre obstacle course.
Figure 2The belt-worn freeze-detecting visual cueing device. Note: the image shows the pilot light pointing upwards. By turning the device, the orientation of the visual cue can be personalised for each individual.
The frequency and duration of freezing episodes and the distance walked by the participants during the 2MWT completed under the off, tonic, and phasic visual cue conditions. Data represent means and standard deviations.
| Visual cue modality | Main effect | Pairwise comparisons | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Off | Tonic | Phasic |
| Off vs. tonic | Off vs. phasic | Tonic vs. phasic | |
| FoG frequency ( | 1.11 (2.23) | 0.95 (1.65) | 1.06 (1.71) | 0.459 | |||
| FoG duration (s) | 5.42 (11.82) | 2.68 (5.61) | 3.47 (5.75) | 0.114 | |||
| Distance (m) | 111.44 (80.51) | 127.30 (87.06) | 116.08 (81.89) | 0.014 | 0.026 | 0.394 | 0.008 |
Note. Off = no visual cue; tonic = continuous visual cue (i.e., gait-independent); phasic = FoG-sensitive visual cue (i.e., gait-dependent).
The frequency and duration of freezing episodes and the time taken to complete the obstacle course under the off, tonic, and phasic visual cue conditions. Data represent means and standard deviations.
| Visual cue modality | Main effect | Pairwise comparisons | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Off | Tonic | Phasic |
| Off vs. tonic | Off vs. phasic | Tonic vs. phasic | |
| FoG frequency ( | 2.88 (2.69) | 1.82 (2.24) | 1.71 (1.57) | 0.192 | |||
| FoG duration (s) | 28.88 (43.91) | 18.41 (48.41) | 15.35 (36.07) | 0.173 | |||
| Course time (s) | 99.76 (51.83) | 82.65 (55.12) | 81.06 (43.07) | 0.357 | |||
Note. Off = no visual cue; tonic = continuous visual cue (i.e., gait-independent); phasic = FoG-sensitive visual cue (i.e., gait-dependent).