Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26329918›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2015

The effects of different sensory augmentation on weight-shifting balance exercises in Parkinson's disease and healthy elderly people: a proof-of-concept study.

Beom-Chan Lee, Timothy A Thrasher, Stanley P Fisher, Charles S Layne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. I-BaR: integrated balance rehabilitation framework.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2024
    Article
  5. Performing Dynamic Weight-Shifting Balance Exercises With a Smartphone-Based Wearable Telerehabilitation System for Home Use by Individuals With Parkinson's Disease: A Proof-of-Concept Study.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2023
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Beom-Chan LeeDepartment of Health and Human Performance, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA. blee24@central.uh.edu.
Timothy A ThrasherDepartment of Health and Human Performance, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA. athrashe@central.uh.edu.
Stanley P FisherCenter for Neuromotor and Biomechanics Research, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA. SFisher@houstonmethodist.org.
Charles S LayneDepartment of Health and Human Performance, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA. clayne2@central.uh.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarlier versions of biofeedback systems for balance-related applications were intended primarily to provide "alarm" signals about body tilt rather than to guide rehabilitation exercise motion. Additionally, there have been few attempts to evaluate guidance modalities for balance rehabilitation exercises. The purpose of this proof-of-concept study is to evaluate the effects of guidance modalities during common dynamic weight-shifting exercises used in clinical settings.

methodsA motion guidance system providing visual biofeedback, vibrotactile biofeedback, or both, was used during weight-shifting exercises. Eleven people with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD) and nine healthy elderly people participated. Each participant wore a six-degree-of-freedom inertial measurement unit (IMU) located near the sacrum and four linear vibrating actuators (Tactors) attached to the skin over the front, back, and right and left sides of the abdomen. The IMU measured angular displacements and velocities of body tilt in anterior-posterior (A/P) and medial-lateral (M/L) directions. Participants were instructed to follow a slow moving target by shifting their weight in either the A/P or M/L direction up to 90 % of their limits of stability (LOS). Real-time position error was provided to participants in one of three sensory modalities: visual, vibrotactile, or both. Participants performed 5 trials for each biofeedback modality and movement direction (A/P and M/L) for a total of 30 trials in a random order. To characterize performance, position error was defined as the average absolute difference between the target and participant movements in degrees.

resultsSimultaneous delivery of visual and vibrotactile biofeedback resulted in significantly lower position error compared to either visual or vibrotactile biofeedback alone regardless of the movement direction for both participant cohorts. The pairwise comparisons were not significantly different between visual and vibrotactile biofeedback.

conclusionThe study is the first attempt to assess the effects of guidance modalities on common balance rehabilitation exercises in people with PD and healthy elderly people. The results suggest that combined visual and vibrotactile biofeedback can improve volitional responses during postural tracking tasks. Index Terms - sensory augmentation, weight-shifting balance exercise, guidance modality, vibrotactile biofeedback, visual biofeedback, Parkinson's disease.

Indexed as

AgedAlgorithmsBiofeedback, PsychologyExercise TherapyFeedback, SensoryFemaleHumansMaleParkinson DiseasePostural BalanceSacrococcygeal RegionSensationSoftwareVibration

Identifiers

PMID26329918
PMCPMC4557900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.