SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · PPR

An examination of the effect of dual task on gait variability in Parkinson’s disease and REM Sleep Behavior disorder

· 2026-05-25

DOI: 10.64898/2026.05.22.26353152

Check source for accessPreprintOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc0

Background Gait variability is a hallmark of Parkinson’s disease (PD) and has been linked to cognitive deficits and fall risk. Rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (RBD) is a strong predictor of synucleinopathies, yet evidence for gait changes in RBD is inconsistent. Performing a dual task increases gait variability, an effect that can be quantified using a cost function. Objective Determine the degree to which dual task cost differs between control, RBD, and PD participants at baseline, and between RBD converters versus non-converters at follow-up. Methods 46 RBD, 23 control, and 14 PD participants completed standardized gait analysis at baseline. Parameters chosen for analysis included enhanced gait variability index (eGVI), functional ambulation performance (FAP), velocity, step length, cadence, base of support, and double support time. Medical records were surveilled for 3 years following participant enrollment, determining that 6 RBD participants converted to PD or dementia. Baseline gait indices and dual task costs were compared between control, RBD, and PD groups at enrollment, and between RBD stable and RBD converters at follow-up. Results The PD group had greater eGVI, as well as greater dual task cost for FAP, cadence, width, and double support time. No differences in gait variability were identified between RBD and control groups at baseline. Compared to the stable group, RBD converters had greater dual task cost for FAP, velocity, cadence, and double support time. Conclusions Increased gait variability during dual task may identify RBD patients at imminent risk of phenoconversion.

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.