Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundMobile gait sensors represent a compelling tool to objectify the severity of symptoms in patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (iPD), but also to determine the therapeutic benefit of interventions. In particular, parameters of Deep Brain stimulation (DBS) with its short latency could be accurately assessed using sensor data. This study aimed at gaining insight into gait changes due to different DBS parameters in patients with subthalamic nucleus (STN) DBS.MethodsAn analysis of various gait examinations was performed on 23 of the initially enrolled 27 iPD patients with chronic STN DBS. Stimulation settings were previously adjusted for either amplitude, frequency, or pulse width in a randomised order. A linear mixed effects model was used to analyse changes in gait speed, stride length, and maximum sensor lift.ResultsThe findings of our study indicate significant improvements in gait speed, stride length, and leg lift measurable with mobile gait sensors under different DBS parameter variations. Notably, we observed positive results at 85 Hz, which proved to be more effective than often applied higher frequencies and that these improvements were traceable across almost all conditions. While pulse widths did produce some improvements in leg lift, they were less well tolerated and had inconsistent effects on some of the gait parameters. Our research suggests that using lower frequencies of DBS may offer a more tolerable and effective approach to enhancing gait in individuals with iPD.ConclusionsOur results advocate for lower stimulation frequencies for patients who report gait difficulties, especially those who can adapt their DBS settings remotely. They also show that mobile gait sensors could be incorporated into clinical practice in the near future.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.