Influence of perturbation velocity on balance control in Parkinson's disease

Contains fulltext : 138303.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Underlying somatosensory processing deficits of joint rotation velocities may cause patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) to be more unstable for fast rather than slow balance perturbations. Such deficits could lead to reduced proprioceptive amplitude feedback triggered by perturbations, and thereby to smaller or delayed stabilizing postural responses. For this reason, we investigated whether support surface perturbation velocity affects balance reactions in PD patients. We examined postural responses of seven PD patients (OFF medication) and eight age-matched controls following backward rotations of a support-surface platform. Rotations occurred at three different speeds: fast (60 deg/s), medium (30 deg/s) or slow (3.8 deg/s), presented in random order. Each subject completed the protocol under eyes open and closed conditions. Full body kinematics, ankle torques and the number of near-falls were recorded. Patients were significantly more unstable than controls following fast perturbations (26% larger displacements of the body's centre of mass; P<0.01), but not following slow perturbations. Also, more near-falls occurred in patients for fast rotations. Balance correcting ankle torques were weaker for patients than controls on the most affected side, but were stronger than controls for the least affected side. These differences were present both with eyes open and eyes closed (P<0.01). Fast support surface rotations caused greater instability and discriminated Parkinson patients better from controls than slow rotations. Although ankle torques on the most affected side were weaker, patients partially compensated for this by generating larger than normal stabilizing torques about the ankle joint on the least affected side. Without this compensation, instability may have been greater

Walking patterns in Parkinson's disease with and without freezing of gait

Item does not contain fulltextThe pathophysiology underlying freezing of gait (FOG) in Parkinson's disease remains incompletely understood. Patients with FOG ("freezers") have a higher temporal variability and asymmetry of strides compared to patients without FOG ("non-freezers"). We aimed to extend this view, by assessing spatial variability and asymmetry of steps and interlimb coordination between the upper and lower limbs during gait. Twelve freezers, 15 non-freezers, and 15 age-matched controls were instructed to walk overground and on a treadmill. Kinematic data were recorded with a motion analysis system. Both freezers and non-freezers showed an increased spatial variability of leg movements compared to controls. In addition, both patient groups had a deficit in interlimb coordination, not only between ipsilateral arms and legs, but also between diagonally positioned limbs. The only difference between freezers and non-freezers was a decreased step length during treadmill walking. We conclude that parkinsonian gait-regardless of FOG-is irregular, not only in the legs, but also with respect to interlimb coordination between the arms and legs. FOG is reflected by abnormal treadmill walking, presumably because this provides a greater challenge to the defective supraspinal control than overground walking, hampering the ability of freezers to increase their stride length when necessary

The effects of vibrotactile biofeedback training on trunk sway in Parkinson's disease patients

Contains fulltext : 109818.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Postural instability in Parkinson's disease (PD) can lead to falls, injuries and reduced quality of life. We investigated whether balance in PD can improve by offering patients feedback about their own trunk sway as a supplement to natural sensory inputs. Specifically, we investigated the effect of artificial vibrotactile biofeedback on trunk sway in PD. METHODS: Twenty PD patients were assigned to a control group (n = 10) or biofeedback group (n = 10). First, all patients performed two sets of six gait tasks and six stance tasks (pre-training assessment). Subsequently, all subjects trained six selected tasks five times (balance training). During this training, the feedback group received vibrotactile feedback of trunk sway, via vibrations delivered at the head. After training, both groups repeated all twelve tasks (post-training assessment). During all tasks, trunk pitch and roll movements were measured with angular velocity sensors attached to the lower trunk. Outcomes included sway angle and sway angular velocity in the roll and pitch plane, and task duration. RESULTS: Overall, patients in the feedback group had a significantly greater reduction in roll (P = 0.005) and pitch (P < 0.001) sway angular velocity. Moreover, roll sway angle increased more in controls after training, suggesting better training effects in the feedback group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: One session of balance training in PD using a biofeedback system showed beneficial effects on trunk stability. Additional research should examine if these effects increase further after more intensive training, how long these persist after training has stopped, and if the observed effects carry over to non-trained tasks

Hospitalization in Parkinson disease: a survey of National Parkinson Foundation Centers

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVES: To explore current practices and opinions regarding hospital management of Parkinson disease (PD) patients in specialized PD Centers. METHODS: Fifty-one out of 54 National Parkinson Foundation (NPF) Centers worldwide completed an online survey regarding hospitalization of PD patients. RESULTS: Many Centers were concerned about the quality of PD-specific care provided to their patients when hospitalized. Primary concerns were adherence to the outpatient medication schedule and poor understanding by hospital staff of medications that worsen PD. Few Centers had a policy with their primary hospital that notified them when their patients were admitted. Rather, notification of hospitalization came often from the patient or a family member. Several Centers (29%) reported not finding out about a hospitalization until a routine clinic visit after discharge. Quick access to outpatient PD care following discharge was a problem in many Centers. Elective surgery, fall/fracture, infection, and mental status changes, were identified as common reasons for hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: There is a perceived need for PD specialists to be involved during hospitalization of their patients. Improvement in communication between hospitals and PD Centers is necessary so that hospital clinicians can take advantage of PD specialists' expertise. Education of hospital staff and clinicians regarding management of PD, complications of PD, and medications to avoid in PD is critical. Most importantly, outpatient access to PD specialists needs to be improved, which may prevent unnecessary hospitalizations in these patients