SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

A scoping review of the nature of physiotherapists' role to avoid fall in people with Parkinsonism.

Neurol Sci · 2021-01-14

DOI: 10.1007/s10072-020-05015-yPMID: 33443671

Open accessScoping Review; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundParkinson's disease (PD) is considered a neurological disease with a high prevalence rate among population. One of its main problems is recurrent fall which has numerous contributing factors such as history of fall, fear of falling, gait deficits, impaired balance, poor functional mobility, and muscle weakness.ObjectiveTo review and explore the focus/nature of interventions which target the role of physiotherapy preventing fall in patients with PD.MethodA scoping review was led dependent on Arksey and O'Malley as discussed by Wood et al. (2002). This paper based on this structure to perceive intervention studies have been embraced in physiotherapy to prevent fall after Parkinson's disease. The search included various databases. The referencing arrangements of every pertinent paper were additionally filtered for more studies.FindingsA total of 173 articles were included, 39 of which met the eligibility criteria. Fifteen studies reported on the direct impact of physiotherapy on fall, while the rest examined the impacts of physiotherapy on factors that are associated with fall. Different outcomes, interventions types, and duration were used in these studies. Findings showed a favorable result of physiotherapy on fall and near fall incidence, balance, gait, functional mobility, muscle strength, and fear of falling.ConclusionPhysiotherapy has the possibility to decrease fall incidence and fall risk in people with PD. However, the heterogeneity in the patients' selection, intervention studies, outcome measures chosen, time since the onset of disease, variation in intensity, and duration of treatment between included studies make the comparisons difficult. Consequently, more studies are needed on best intervention.

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.