Chiahao Lu1, Kenneth H Louie2,3, Amber M Stutz4,5, Colum D MacKinnon4, Scott E Cooper4. 1. Department of Neurology, University of Minnesota, 516E. 717 Delaware Building. 717 Delaware St. SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55414, USA. luxxx214@umn.edu. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 55414, USA. 3. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA. 4. Department of Neurology, University of Minnesota, 516E. 717 Delaware Building. 717 Delaware St. SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55414, USA. 5. Neurology, Sanford Brain and Spine Center, Fargo, ND, 58103, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This experiment tested if balance performance differed between a standardized treadmill surface perturbation task and a clinical pull test and was affected by medication or the presence of body weight support in people with Parkinson's disease (PD). METHODS: Twenty-seven individuals were tested (14 PD in both ON- and OFF-medication states). Clinical pull test and rapid forward (backward fall) translations of the support surface were applied to induce postural reactions requiring at least 1 step to restore balance. The effects of pull type (clinical vs. treadmill), partial bodyweight support (0 vs 20% body weight) and group (control, PD ON-meds and PD OFF-meds) on reactive stepping as well as practice/learning effect were examined. The number of steps taken and the first step duration were entered in linear repeated-measures mixed-effect models separately. RESULTS: The effects of pull type, group, and bodyweight support were all significant in both metrics, as was ON- vs. OFF-medication. A significant interaction term (group x pull type) was found in the first step duration, showing that the group difference was greater in treadmill compared to the clinical pull test. A significant practice effect was also observed within and across testing sessions. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized treadmill perturbation performed slightly better than the classical pull test in distinguishing between groups, and partial weight support did not substantially degrade the test's performance to detect the balance deficits in people with PD.
OBJECTIVE: This experiment tested if balance performance differed between a standardized treadmill surface perturbation task and a clinical pull test and was affected by medication or the presence of body weight support in people with Parkinson's disease (PD). METHODS: Twenty-seven individuals were tested (14 PD in both ON- and OFF-medication states). Clinical pull test and rapid forward (backward fall) translations of the support surface were applied to induce postural reactions requiring at least 1 step to restore balance. The effects of pull type (clinical vs. treadmill), partial bodyweight support (0 vs 20% body weight) and group (control, PD ON-meds and PD OFF-meds) on reactive stepping as well as practice/learning effect were examined. The number of steps taken and the first step duration were entered in linear repeated-measures mixed-effect models separately. RESULTS: The effects of pull type, group, and bodyweight support were all significant in both metrics, as was ON- vs. OFF-medication. A significant interaction term (group x pull type) was found in the first step duration, showing that the group difference was greater in treadmill compared to the clinical pull test. A significant practice effect was also observed within and across testing sessions. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized treadmill perturbation performed slightly better than the classical pull test in distinguishing between groups, and partial weight support did not substantially degrade the test's performance to detect the balance deficits in people with PD.
Authors: Molly A McVey; Sommer Amundsen; Annaria Barnds; Kelly E Lyons; Rajesh Pahwa; Jonathan D Mahnken; Carl W Luchies Journal: Gait Posture Date: 2013-04-20 Impact factor: 2.840
Authors: Christopher G Goetz; Barbara C Tilley; Stephanie R Shaftman; Glenn T Stebbins; Stanley Fahn; Pablo Martinez-Martin; Werner Poewe; Cristina Sampaio; Matthew B Stern; Richard Dodel; Bruno Dubois; Robert Holloway; Joseph Jankovic; Jaime Kulisevsky; Anthony E Lang; Andrew Lees; Sue Leurgans; Peter A LeWitt; David Nyenhuis; C Warren Olanow; Olivier Rascol; Anette Schrag; Jeanne A Teresi; Jacobus J van Hilten; Nancy LaPelle Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2008-11-15 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Digna de Kam; Jorik Nonnekes; Lars B Oude Nijhuis; Alexander C H Geurts; Bastiaan R Bloem; Vivian Weerdesteyn Journal: J Neurol Date: 2014-09-17 Impact factor: 4.849