SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Implementation of high-cadence cycling for Parkinson's disease in the community setting: A pragmatic feasibility study.

Brain Behav · 2021-02-09

DOI: 10.1002/brb3.2053PMID: 33559973

Open accessClinical Trial; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Multicenter Study; Pragmatic Clinical Trial; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundEfficacy of exercise to improve motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD) has been established in multiple clinical trials. The Pedaling for Parkinson's ™ (PFP) program is an existing community-based cycling intervention for individuals with PD. Although PFP program design was informed by in-laboratory efficacy studies, the implementation and effectiveness of the program in the community have not been studied. This feasibility study explores implementation and effectiveness of PFP utilizing the RE-AIM implementation evaluation framework.MethodsThis was a pragmatic open-label multi-site study. First, community-based gyms were recruited to implement the PFP protocol with enhanced multi-modal training and support. Second individuals with Hoehn and Yahr stage I-III idiopathic PD were recruited to participate. Reach, effectiveness (both clinical scores and participant enjoyment), adoption, implementation (gym and participant fidelity, cost), and maintenance (sustainability) were assessed. Tracking of adverse events was used to monitor safety of the intervention.ResultsReach was moderate: 59% of participants who expressed interest opted to participate. No effectiveness outcomes demonstrated a significant change from pre to post; however, the program was highly enjoyable (96% of participants who started classes enjoyed the program and 87% wished to continue). Adoption was poor with only four out of 34 gyms participating. The program had poor gym and moderate participant fidelity. The program was maintained for at least 4 months across all sites. The program was implemented safely.ConclusionBarriers to implementation of nonpharmacologic interventions such as exercise protocols limit reach and availability of these interventions to patients. Pilot studies are needed to inform and direct further implementation efforts. Our pilot study suggests the PFP cycling intervention should be modified prior to attempts at widespread implementation. Modifications made by gyms in this study suggest adaptations to the protocol that may increase fidelity and effectiveness.

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.