SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

The Effects of Action Observation Therapy as a Rehabilitation Tool in Parkinson's Disease Patients: A Systematic Review.

Int J Environ Res Public Health · 2022-03-11

DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19063311PMID: 35329000

Open accessSystematic Review; review-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

During Action Observation (AO), patients observe human movements that they then try to imitate physically. Until now, few studies have investigated the effectiveness of it in Parkinson's disease (PD). However, due to the diversity of interventions, it is unclear how the dose and characteristics can affect its efficiency. We investigated the AO protocols used in PD, by discussing the intervention features and the outcome measures in relation to their efficacy. A search was conducted through MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane, and WoS until November 2021, for RCTs with AO interventions. Participant's characteristics, treatment features, outcome measures, and main results were extracted from each study. Results were gathered into a quantitative synthesis (MD and 95% CI) for each time point. Seven studies were included in the review, with 227 participants and a mean PEDro score of 6.7. These studies reported positive effects of AO in PD patients, mainly on walking ability and typical motor signs of PD like freezing of gait. However, disagreements among authors exist, mainly due to the heterogeneity of the intervention features. In overall, AO improves functional abilities and motor control in PD patients, with the intervention dose and the characteristics of the stimulus playing a decisive role in its efficacy.

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.