SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Dual-Task Performance in GBA Parkinson's Disease.

Parkinsons Dis · 2017-07-27

DOI: 10.1155/2017/8582740PMID: 28819579

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

IntroductionParkinson's disease patients carrying a heterozygous mutation in the gene glucocerebrosidase (GBA-PD) show faster motor and cognitive decline than idiopathic Parkinson's disease (iPD) patients, but the mechanisms behind this observation are not well understood. Successful dual tasking (DT) requires a smooth integration of motor and nonmotor operations. This study compared the DT performances between GBA-PD and iPD patients.MethodsEleven GBA-PD patients (p.N370S, p.L444P) and eleven matched iPD patients were included. Clinical characterization included a motor score (Unified PD Rating Scale-III, UPDRS-III) and nonmotor scores (Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA, and Beck's Depression Inventory). Quantitative gait analysis during the single-task (ST) and DT assessments was performed using a wearable sensor unit. These parameters corrected for UPDRS and MoCA were then compared between the groups.ResultsUnder the DT condition "walking while checking boxes," GBA-PD patients showed slower gait and box-checking speeds than iPD patients. GBA-PD and iPD patients did not show significant differences regarding dual-task costs.ConclusionThis pilot study suggests that DT performance with a secondary motor task is worse in GBA-PD than in iPD patients. This finding may be associated with the known enhanced motor and cognitive deficits in GBA-PD compared to iPD and should motivate further studies.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.