IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i2p953-d1025500.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Backward Walking Performance in Parkinson’s Disease with and without Freezing of Gait—A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Tracy Milane

    (AGEIS, Université Grenoble Alpes, 38000 Grenoble, France
    Department of Neurology, UKSH Campus Kiel, Kiel University, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus D, 24105 Kiel, Germany)

  • Clint Hansen

    (Department of Neurology, UKSH Campus Kiel, Kiel University, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus D, 24105 Kiel, Germany)

  • Matthias Chardon

    (AGEIS, Université Grenoble Alpes, 38000 Grenoble, France)

  • Edoardo Bianchini

    (AGEIS, Université Grenoble Alpes, 38000 Grenoble, France
    Department of Neurology, UKSH Campus Kiel, Kiel University, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus D, 24105 Kiel, Germany
    Department of Neuroscience, Mental Health and Sensory Organs (NESMOS), Sapienza University of Rome, 00189 Rome, Italy)

  • Nicolas Vuillerme

    (AGEIS, Université Grenoble Alpes, 38000 Grenoble, France
    LabCom Telecom4Health, Orange Labs & Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Inria, Grenoble INP-UGA, 38000 Grenoble, France
    Institut Universitaire de France, 75005 Paris, France)

Abstract

Introduction: Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disease characterized by motor symptoms and gait impairments. Among them, freezing of gait (FOG) is one of the most disabling manifestations. Backward walking (BW) is an activity of daily life that individuals with PD might find difficult and could cause falls. Recent studies have reported that gait impairments in PD were more pronounced in BW, particularly in people presenting FOG. However, to the best of our knowledge, no systematic review has synthetized the literature which compared BW performance in PD patients with and without FOG. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in BW performance between PD patients with FOG and PD patients without FOG. Methods: Two databases, PubMed and Web of Science, were systematically searched to identify studies comparing BW performance in PD patients with and without FOG. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) tool was used to assess the quality of the studies included. Results: Seven studies with 431 PD patients (179 PD with FOG and 252 PD without FOG) met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Among them, 5 studies reported walking speed, 3 studies step length, stride length and lower limb range of motion, 2 studies functional ambulation profile, toe clearance height, swing, and stance percent and 1 study reported the decomposition index and stepping coordination. Compared to PD patients without FOG, PD patients with FOG showed slower walking speed and reduced step length in 3 studies, shorter stride length, lower functional ambulation profile and decreased ankle range of motion in 2 studies, and smaller swing percent, higher stance percent, worse stepping coordination, greater decomposition between movements, and lower toe clearance height in one study. Conclusion: Despite the small number of included studies, the findings of this review suggested that PD patients with FOG have worse gait performance during the BW task than PD without FOG.

Suggested Citation

  • Tracy Milane & Clint Hansen & Matthias Chardon & Edoardo Bianchini & Nicolas Vuillerme, 2023. "Comparing Backward Walking Performance in Parkinson’s Disease with and without Freezing of Gait—A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-23, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:2:p:953-:d:1025500
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/2/953/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/2/953/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:2:p:953-:d:1025500. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.