Training Based On Declarative Memory Cues Improved Gait In Patients With Parkinson's Disease
NCT ID: NCT02600728
Last Updated: 2015-11-09
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
50 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2014-03-31
2015-10-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Mental Practice Combined With Physical Practice to Improve the Gait Performance of People With Parkinson's Disease
NCT02904837
Gait Training With Cognitive Tasks in Parkinson's Disease
NCT02025517
Prospective Memory Training in Parkinson Disease
NCT03582670
Protocol: Mental Practice Combined With Physical Practice of Gait in Parkinson's Disease.
NCT03565965
Model-based Cueing-as-needed for Walking in Parkinson's Disease
NCT06073028
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Objectives: To verify the long-term efficiency of a new strategy based on declarative memory cue to improve the gait performance and independence in daily life activities (DLA) in patients with PD.
Design: Parallel prospective, single blind, randomized clinical trial. Setting: Brazilian Parkinson Association. Participants: Forty-four patients with PD in stages 2-3 of disease evolution according to Hoehn and Yahr Classification Interventions: The experimental training (ET) consisted of eight gait training sessions, twice a week, using the declarative memory cues strategy (DMCS). The control training (CT) consisted of a similar gait training without DMCS.
Primary outcome measure: Gait performance in terms of speed and stride length. Secondary outcome measure: Independence in DLA according to Section II of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale.
Randomization: Participants were randomized into a control group (CG), which performed the CT, and an experimental group (EG), which performed the ET, through blinded drawing of names.
Statistical analysis: The gait performance and ADL independence before, 2 and 60 days after the end of training were compared for CG and EG using Repeated-measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA).
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
experimental group (EG)
The experimental training (ET) consisted of eight gait training sessions, twice a week, using the declarative memory cues strategy (DMCS).
Experimental Training
The ET consisted of 3 phases being that the first one (Phase 1) was done only in the first session.
Phase 1: patients received a short and simple explanation about the deficiency in automatic movement resulting from PD. Following explanation, the patient memorized a sequence of declarative cues. Phase 2: the patient organized a sequence of cues using cards illustrating the subcomponent movements (key movement) involved in taking steps.
Phase 3: the patient had to train using declarative cues as a gait performance aid through 8 sets follow the instruction "Walk in your ordinary speed. Use the key movements and going to saying each of them while you make them. The declarative cues had to be evoked verbally by the patients themselves, during gait, triggering the corresponding movement.
control group (CG)
The control training (CT) consisted of a similar gait training without DMCS.
Control Training
The CT consisted of 3 phases, being the first one (Phase 1) was done only in the first session of training, and the other two (Phase 2 and 3) were repeated at each of the 8 sessions.
Phase 1: Patients received a short and simple explanation about the deficiency in automatic movement resulting from PD.
Phase 2: Patients received a general verbal attentional instruction of "pay attention to your steps and try to walk as better as you can", before starting the walk.
Phase 3: motor training of gait, where the patient had to perform 8 sets, following the instruction "Walk in your ordinary speed, paying attention to your steps" in the identical trajectories of ET. Additional instructions or cues were not provided.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Experimental Training
The ET consisted of 3 phases being that the first one (Phase 1) was done only in the first session.
Phase 1: patients received a short and simple explanation about the deficiency in automatic movement resulting from PD. Following explanation, the patient memorized a sequence of declarative cues. Phase 2: the patient organized a sequence of cues using cards illustrating the subcomponent movements (key movement) involved in taking steps.
Phase 3: the patient had to train using declarative cues as a gait performance aid through 8 sets follow the instruction "Walk in your ordinary speed. Use the key movements and going to saying each of them while you make them. The declarative cues had to be evoked verbally by the patients themselves, during gait, triggering the corresponding movement.
Control Training
The CT consisted of 3 phases, being the first one (Phase 1) was done only in the first session of training, and the other two (Phase 2 and 3) were repeated at each of the 8 sessions.
Phase 1: Patients received a short and simple explanation about the deficiency in automatic movement resulting from PD.
Phase 2: Patients received a general verbal attentional instruction of "pay attention to your steps and try to walk as better as you can", before starting the walk.
Phase 3: motor training of gait, where the patient had to perform 8 sets, following the instruction "Walk in your ordinary speed, paying attention to your steps" in the identical trajectories of ET. Additional instructions or cues were not provided.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* in stage 2-3 of the disease evolution according to the Hoehn and Yahr;
* treated with levodopa or its synergists;
* capable to ambulate independently indoors without aid;
* referring 5 to 15 years of education;
* good visual and auditory acuity.
Exclusion Criteria
* visual and auditory deficiency;
* dementia \[assessed by the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), cut-off 23\];
* depression \[according to the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15), cut-off 6\]
* participation in other physical therapy training.
65 Years
80 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Sao Paulo General Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Maria Elisa P Piemonte, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Department of Physiotherapy, Communication Science & Disorders, Occupational Therapy, School of Medicine, University of São Paulo
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Department of Physiotherapy, Communication Science & Disorders, Occupational Therapy, School of Medicine, University of São Paulo
São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
USPNEC006
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.