SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Exergaming Compared to Conventional Physical Exercise Interventions on Health Status in Older People with Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Medicina (Kaunas) · 2025-11-08

DOI: 10.3390/medicina61112001PMID: 41303837

Open accessMeta-Analysis; Systematic 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

Background and Objectives: This systematic review aimed to analyze published peer-reviewed studies on the effects of exergaming (EXG) compared to conventional physical exercise (CPE) interventions on health status in older people with Parkinson's disease (PD) according to training dose. Materials and Methods: Using six generic databases: PubMed, EBSCO, Medline, CINAHL Complete, Scopus, and Web of Science, the PRISMA, TESTEX, RoB 2, and GRADE tools assessed methodological quality and certainty. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (code: CRD42024575969). Results: Out of 805 records, 14 randomized controlled trials with 406 older people with PD were included. Seven overall meta-analyses showed significant improvements (p p > 0.05) in the Unified PD Rating Scale, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Timed Up-and-Go and Falls Efficacy Scale-International. Four subgroup meta-analyses, according to training schedules, showed that there were significant improvements (p 8 weeks of training (ES = 1.38), >3 weeks per week (ES = 1.18), 20 total sessions (ES = 1.31). Both weeks and total sessions were predictors of BBS performance in EXG interventions in older people with PD. Conclusions: EXG is an innovative alternative to improve the health status in balance, gait, and quality of life variables in older people with PD, with a high potential for clinical practice in this population. The training dose is a determinant (weeks and total sessions) that varies the response to intervention in the BBS.

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.