SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Effects of Smile Training on Gait Disturbance in Parkinson's Disease Patient with Neuropsychiatric Symptoms: A Single Case Design.

Phys Ther Res · 2024-09-11

DOI: 10.1298/ptr.e10290PMID: 39866393

Open accessJournal Article; Case Reports; case-reportOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

ObjectiveTo verify the efficacy of smile training in improving gait disturbances in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) exhibiting neuropsychiatric symptoms.MethodsA single-case BAB design with three intervention periods (B1, A1, and B2) was used. During periods B1 and B2, 10 min of smile training (facial muscles training and positive thinking training) was performed before the usual exercise therapy. During the A1 period, the participant received only the usual exercise therapy. During the intervention period, the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) was performed daily in both directions. Tau-U was calculated to determine the effect size of the TUG test time and the number of steps taken during each period. Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part III, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), 10-meter walk at maximum speed, Berg Balance Scale, and Characterizing Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (C-FOGQ) were administered on the day before the start of the intervention and the last day of each period.ResultsComparisons of A1 to B2, TUG time, and the number of steps taken on both turns revealed large reductions (Tau-U ≥0.74, p ConclusionSmile training may be an effective intervention for improving gait and other motor symptoms in patients with PD.

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.