28 research outputs found

    Alzheimer's disease phenotypes show different sleep architecture

    Full text link
    Sleep-wake disturbances are a prominent feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Atypical (non-amnestic) AD syndromes have different patterns of cortical vulnerability to AD. We hypothesized that atypical AD also shows differential vulnerability in subcortical nuclei that will manifest as different patterns of sleep dysfunction.Overnight electroencephalography monitoring was performed on 48 subjects, including 15 amnestic, 19 atypical AD, and 14 controls. AD was defined based on neuropathological or biomarker confirmation. We compared sleep architecture by visual scoring and spectral power analysis in each group.Overall, AD cases showed increased sleep fragmentation and N1 sleep compared to controls. Compared to atypical AD groups, typical AD showed worse N3 sleep dysfunction and relatively preserved rapid eye movement (REM) sleep.Results suggest differing effects of amnestic and atypical AD variants on slow wave versus REM sleep, respectively, corroborating the hypothesis of differential selective vulnerability patterns of the subcortical nuclei within variants. Optimal symptomatic treatment for sleep dysfunction in clinical phenotypes may differ.Alzheimer's disease (AD) variants show distinct patterns of sleep impairment. Amnestic/typical AD has worse N3 slow wave sleep (SWS) impairment compared to atypical AD. Atypical AD shows more rapid eye movement deficits than typical AD. Selective vulnerability patterns in subcortical areas may underlie sleep differences. Relatively preserved SWS may explain better memory scores in atypical versus typical AD.© 2023 the Alzheimer's Association

    Lower Limb Kinematic and Kinetic Differences between Transtibial Amputee Fallers and Non-Fallers

    No full text
    Stair walking relies on concentric contraction of the ankle plantarflexor and knee extensor muscles, which are either absent or weakened in transtibial amputees. As a result the risk of falling is increased in this population. The aim of this study was to compare the gait patterns of transtibial amputee fallers and non-fallers during stair ascent. Eleven participants (fallers = 6; non-fallers = 5) walked along a 3-m walkway and ascended a three-step staircase with handrails, at their self-selected pace, while three-dimensional kinematic data were collected from the lower limbs. A force plate was embedded into the first step and kinetic data were measured for the intact lead limb only. The fallers walked significantly faster (p = 0.00) and exhibited less hip flexion (p = 0.05) and less anterior pelvic tilt (p = 0.04) compared to the non-fallers. The fallers had significantly greater first and second peak vertical ground reaction force (GRF) on the intact limb than the non-fallers (p = 0.05 and p = 0.01, respectively) contributing to the significantly larger ankle (p = 0.02) and hip moments (p = 0.04). These findings suggested the amputee non-fallers performed mechanically demanding tasks more cautiously. Two of the participants self-selected a ‘step to’ gait pattem, ascending one step at a time. This may be considered a compensatory mechanism for the lack of ankle mobility and functional muscle performance in these two transtibial amputees
    corecore