SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Visual Exploration While Walking With and Without Visual Cues in Parkinson's Disease: Freezer Versus Non-Freezer.

Neurorehabil Neural Repair · 2023-09-29

DOI: 10.1177/15459683231201149PMID: 37772512

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundVisual cues can improve gait in Parkinson's disease (PD), including those experiencing freezing of gait (FOG). However, responses are variable and underpinning mechanisms remain unclear. Visuo-cognitive processing (measured through visual exploration) has been implicated in cue response, but this has not been comprehensively examined.ObjectiveTo examine visual exploration and gait with and without visual cues in PD who do and do not self-report FOG, and healthy controls (HC).Methods17 HC, 21 PD without FOG, and 22 PD with FOG walked with and without visual cues, under single and dual-task conditions. Visual exploration (ie, saccade frequency, duration, peak velocity, amplitude, and fixation duration) was measured via mobile eye-tracking and gait (ie, gait speed, stride length, foot strike angle, stride time, and stride time variability) with inertial sensors.ResultsPD had impaired gait compared to HC, and dual-tasking made gait variables worse across groups (all P P P ConclusionVisual cues improved visual exploration and gait outcomes in HC and PD, with similar responses in freezers and non-freezers. Freezer and non-freezer specific associations between cue-related changes in visual exploration and gait indicate different underlying visuo-cognitive processing within these subgroups for cue response.

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.