16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A systematic review on exercise and training-based interventions for freezing of gait in Parkinson’s disease

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Freezing of gait (FOG) in Parkinson’s disease (PD) causes severe patient burden despite pharmacological management. Exercise and training are therefore advocated as important adjunct therapies. In this meta-analysis, we assess the existing evidence for such interventions to reduce FOG, and further examine which type of training helps the restoration of gait function in particular. The primary meta-analysis across 41 studies and 1838 patients revealed a favorable moderate effect size (ES = −0.37) of various training modalities for reducing subjective FOG-severity ( p < 0.00001), though several interventions were not directly aimed at FOG and some included non-freezers. However, exercise and training also proved beneficial in a secondary analysis on freezers only (ES = −0.32, p = 0.007). We further revealed that dedicated training aimed at reducing FOG episodes (ES = −0.24) or ameliorating the underlying correlates of FOG (ES = −0.40) was moderately effective ( p < 0.01), while generic exercises were not (ES = −0.14, p = 0.12). Relevantly, no retention effects were seen after cessation of training (ES = −0.08, p = 0.36). This review thereby supports the implementation of targeted training as a treatment for FOG with the need for long-term engagement.

          Related collections

          Most cited references117

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study

          Background Within systematic reviews, when searching for relevant references, it is advisable to use multiple databases. However, searching databases is laborious and time-consuming, as syntax of search strategies are database specific. We aimed to determine the optimal combination of databases needed to conduct efficient searches in systematic reviews and whether the current practice in published reviews is appropriate. While previous studies determined the coverage of databases, we analyzed the actual retrieval from the original searches for systematic reviews. Methods Since May 2013, the first author prospectively recorded results from systematic review searches that he performed at his institution. PubMed was used to identify systematic reviews published using our search strategy results. For each published systematic review, we extracted the references of the included studies. Using the prospectively recorded results and the studies included in the publications, we calculated recall, precision, and number needed to read for single databases and databases in combination. We assessed the frequency at which databases and combinations would achieve varying levels of recall (i.e., 95%). For a sample of 200 recently published systematic reviews, we calculated how many had used enough databases to ensure 95% recall. Results A total of 58 published systematic reviews were included, totaling 1746 relevant references identified by our database searches, while 84 included references had been retrieved by other search methods. Sixteen percent of the included references (291 articles) were only found in a single database; Embase produced the most unique references (n = 132). The combination of Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, and Google Scholar performed best, achieving an overall recall of 98.3 and 100% recall in 72% of systematic reviews. We estimate that 60% of published systematic reviews do not retrieve 95% of all available relevant references as many fail to search important databases. Other specialized databases, such as CINAHL or PsycINFO, add unique references to some reviews where the topic of the review is related to the focus of the database. Conclusions Optimal searches in systematic reviews should search at least Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar as a minimum requirement to guarantee adequate and efficient coverage. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Freezing of gait: moving forward on a mysterious clinical phenomenon.

            Freezing of gait (FoG) is a unique and disabling clinical phenomenon characterised by brief episodes of inability to step or by extremely short steps that typically occur on initiating gait or on turning while walking. Patients with FoG, which is a feature of parkinsonian syndromes, show variability in gait metrics between FoG episodes and a substantial reduction in step length with frequent trembling of the legs during FoG episodes. Physiological, functional imaging, and clinical-pathological studies point to disturbances in frontal cortical regions, the basal ganglia, and the midbrain locomotor region as the probable origins of FoG. Medications, deep brain stimulation, and rehabilitation techniques can alleviate symptoms of FoG in some patients, but these treatments lack efficacy in patients with advanced FoG. A better understanding of the phenomenon is needed to aid the development of effective therapeutic strategies. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Reliability of the new freezing of gait questionnaire: agreement between patients with Parkinson's disease and their carers.

              Freezing of gait (FOG) is difficult to measure due to its unpredictable occurrence. This study investigated: (1) whether the new freezing of gait questionnaire (NFOG-Q) is a reliable measure of freezing by comparing patients' ratings with those of carers' and (2) whether adding a video improved its reliability. Non-demented people with Parkinson's disease (PD) (N=102) and their carers of similar age and cognitive status were recruited from movement disorders clinics in three countries. The NFOG-Q was administered to carers and patients independently before and after watching a video showing several examples of FOG. Patients had very high agreement between their pre- and post-video detection of FOG (Kappa=0.91). However, this was less than in carers (Kappa=0.79). The video had a significant influence (p=0.01) on the rating of FOG severity (duration) but not on the estimation of its functional impact. Post-video freezing severity scores in the 69 freezers showed high agreement with carers' scores (ICC=0.78 [0.65;0.87]). We conclude that the NFOG-Q is a reliable tool to detect and evaluate the impact and severity of FOG. Adding a video does not add to the sensitivity and specificity of FOG detection but influences the estimation of FOG severity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                moran.gilat@kuleuven.be
                Journal
                NPJ Parkinsons Dis
                NPJ Parkinsons Dis
                NPJ Parkinson's Disease
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2373-8057
                10 September 2021
                10 September 2021
                2021
                : 7
                : 81
                Affiliations
                GRID grid.5596.f, ISNI 0000 0001 0668 7884, KU Leuven, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, , Neurorehabilitation Research Group (eNRGy), ; Leuven, Belgium
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0072-4637
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6762-3347
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3935-7256
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5306-5903
                Article
                224
                10.1038/s41531-021-00224-4
                8433229
                34508083
                9941b526-e403-4f32-b942-700b02919e7f
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 1 January 2021
                : 12 August 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: M.G. is funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions grant agreement No 838576
                Funded by: FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/100000864, Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research (Michael J. Fox Foundation);
                Award ID: 16347
                Award ID: 16347
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/501100003130, Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Research Foundation Flanders);
                Award ID: 11B5421N
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/100009575, Jacques und Gloria Gossweiler-Stiftung (Jacques and Gloria Gossweiler Foundation);
                Funded by: Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research (Michael J. Fox Foundation)
                Categories
                Review Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                parkinson's disease,rehabilitation
                parkinson's disease, rehabilitation

                Comments

                Comment on this article