Author: Marazzi S1, Kiper P2, Palmer K3, Agostini M2, Turolla A4
1ASST Ovest Milanese, Legnano Hospital, Legnano, Milano, Italy.
2Laboratory of Neurorehabilitation Technologies, Fondazione Ospedale San Camillo IRCCS, Venice, Italy.
3Department of Geriatrics, Centro Medicina dell'Invecchiamento, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
4Laboratory of Neurorehabilitation Technologies, Fondazione Ospedale San Camillo IRCCS, Venice, Italy - firstname.lastname@example.org.
Conference/Journal: Eur J Phys Rehabil Med.
Date published: 2020 Jan 14
Other: Special Notes: doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.20.06099-2. [Epub ahead of print] , Word Count: 265
INTRODUCTION: Among the different rehabilitative approaches to Parkinson's disease, there is conflicting evidence about the effects of vibratory stimulation and its capability to modulate the central elaboration of proprioceptive stimuli. The hypothesis is that the vibration-induced sensorial perturbation (through Whole Body Vibration (WBV) or localized vibration) can influence the motor response in complex tasks such as postural control and gait. Thus, the objective of this review was to evaluate the effect of different modalities of vibratory stimulation treatment on balance, gait signs and symptoms, and quality of life, in patients with Parkinson's disease.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: From the initial 1249 records, 10 of them which compared Whole Body Vibration (WBV) or localized vibration to conventional physiotherapy were included (i.e. randomized controlled trials, crossover trials, and quasi-experimental trials). Finally, five papers on WBV were included in quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis), while for three studies on localized vibrations a qualitative synthesis was performed. Two independent reviewers selected potentially relevant studies based on the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and evaluated the methodological quality.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Meta-analysis was performed among five studies on WBV treatment, whose effect was found to be significantly better than standard treatment for improving gait (measured by Timed Up and Go test and Stand-walk-sit test: Standardized Mean Difference= -0.51; 95% confidence interval= -1.00 to -0.01). Conversely, WBV was not significantly better than standard treatment for all the other outcomes. Due to high heterogeneity it was not possible to conduct a quantitative meta-analysis on studies of localized vibration.
CONCLUSIONS: Results of the review show that WBV can improve gait performance in patients with Parkinson's disease.
PMID: 31939269 DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.20.06099-2