Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.
Wearable sensing technology is a new way to deliver corrective feedback. It is highly applicable to gait rehabilitation for persons with Parkinson's disease (PD) because feedback potentially engages spared neural function. Our study characterizes participants' motor adaptation to feedback signaling a deviation from their normal cadence during prolonged walking, providing insight into possible novel therapeutic devices for gait re-training. Twenty-eight persons with PD (15 with freezing, 13 without) and 13 age-matched healthy elderly (HE) walked for two 30-minute sessions. When their cadence varied, they heard either intelligent cueing (IntCue: bouts of ten beats indicating normal cadence) or intelligent feedback (IntFB: verbal instruction to increase or decrease cadence). We created a model that compares the effectiveness of the two conditions by quantifying the number of steps needed to return to the target cadence for every deviation. The model fits the short-term motor responses to the external step inputs (collected with wearable sensors). We found some significant difference in motor adaptation among groups and subgroups for the IntCue condition only. Both conditions were instead able to identify different types of responders among persons with PD, although showing opposite trends in their speed of adaptation. Increasing rather than decreasing the pace appeared to be more difficult for both groups. In fact, under IntFB the PD group required about seven steps to increase their cadence, whereas they only needed about three steps to decrease their cadence. However, it is important to note that this difference was not significant; perhaps future work could include more participants and/or more sessions, increasing the total number of deviations for analysis. Notably, a significant negative correlation, r = -0.57 (p-value = 0.008), was found between speed of adaptation and number of deviations during IntCue, but not during IntFB, suggesting that, for people who struggle with gait, such as those with PD, verbal instructions rather than metronome beats might be more effective at restoring normal cadence. Clinicians and biofeedback developers designing novel therapeutic devices could apply our findings to determine the optimal timing for corrective feedback, optimizing gait rehabilitation while minimizing the risk of cue-dependency.
Pubmed ID: 31607899
Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.
The Museum of Comparative Anthropogeny (MOCA) is a collection of comparative information regarding humans and our closest evolutionary cousins (chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans i.e, great apes), with an emphasis on uniquely human features. MOCA is organized by Domains, each grouping Topics by areas of interest and scientific discipline. Each topic entry will eventually cover existing information about a particular difference (alleged or documented) between humans and non-human hominids. Comparisons of these non-human hominids with humans are difficult, as so little is known about their phenotypic features (phenomes), in contrast to humans. Ethical, fiscal and practical issues also limit collection of further information about great apes. MOCA attempts to collect existing information about human-specific differences from great apes, currently scattered in the literature. Having such information in one location could lead to new insights and multi-disciplinary interactions, and to ethically-sound studies to explain differences, and uniquely human specializations. MOCA is not targeted at experts in specific disciplines, but rather aims to communicate basic information to a broad audience of scientists from many backgrounds, and to the interested lay public. MOCA includes not only aspects wherein there are known or apparent differences between humans and great apes, but additionally, topics for which popular wisdom about claimed or assumed differences is not entirely correct. It is for all these reasons that MOCA is called a Museum, and not an Encyclopedia or Database.
View all literature mentions