Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundGait impairment is a key feature in later stages of Parkinson's disease (PD), which often responds poorly to pharmacological therapies. Neuromodulatory treatment by low-intensity noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation (nGVS) has indicated positive effects on postural instability in PD, which may possibly be conveyed to improvement of dynamic gait dysfunction.ObjectiveTo investigate the effects of individually tuned nGVS on normal and cognitively challenged walking in PD patients with mild-to-moderate gait dysfunction.MethodsEffects of nGVS of varying intensities (0-0.7 mA) on body sway were examined in 32 patients with PD (ON medication state, Hoehn and Yahr: 2.3 ± 0.5), who were standing with eyes closed on a posturographic force plate. Treatment response and optimal nGVS stimulation intensity were determined on an individual patient level. In a second step, the effects of optimal nGVS vs. sham treatment on walking with preferred speed and with a cognitive dual task were investigated by assessment of spatiotemporal gait parameters on a pressure-sensitive gait carpet.ResultsEvaluation of individual balance responses yielded that 59% of patients displayed a beneficial balance response to nGVS treatment with an average optimal improvement of 23%. However, optimal nGVS had no effects on gait parameters neither for the normal nor the cognitively challenged walking condition compared to sham stimulation irrespective of the nGVS responder status.ConclusionsLow-intensity nGVS seems to have differential treatment effects on static postural imbalance and continuous gait dysfunction in PD, which could be explained by a selective modulation of midbrain-thalamic circuits of balance control.
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.