Skip to content

Motor and Cognitive Dual-task Gait Training Effect Functional Outcome in Intellectual Disability

Comparative Effects of Motor and Cognitive Dual-task Gait Training on Balance and Mobility in Persons With Intellectual Disabilities

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05334498
Enrollment
54
Registered
2022-04-19
Start date
2021-08-01
Completion date
2022-01-01
Last updated
2022-04-19

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Intellectual Disability

Keywords

Motor and cognitive dual task gait training

Brief summary

To find out the comparative effects of motor and cognitive dual gait training on improving the balance control and mobility skills among intellectual disable patients.

Detailed description

Previous studies had done a lot of work in improving balance and mobility skills by combining both motor and cognitive dual gait training (CDT and MDT) techniques among Down syndrome, Parkinsonism and so on but not a single study was conducted in order to determine the comparative effects of CDT and MDT especially in intellectual disability individuals to improve balance so the study was conducted in order to find the comparative effect for the better understanding of the treatment effects.

Interventions

OTHERMotor dual-task gait training

Patients were instructed to walk either on treadmill or on the land. During walk; patients were instructed to perform five tasks. The patients performed tossing and catching the ball, rehanging loops on hoops, buttoning and unbuttoning the shirts, holding the cup in water without the spilling and receiving with returning the water. Each activity were performed for three minute and 15 minutes were provided for performing all the tasks

OTHERCognitive dual-task gait training

Patients were instructed to walk either on treadmill or on the land. During walk; patients were instructed to perform five tasks. The patients performed sharp coloring, subtraction, counting, verbal analogical reasoning and backward spelling. Each activity were performed for three minute and 15 minutes were provided for performing all the tasks

Sponsors

Riphah International University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
12 Years to 20 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Both genders having IQ range between 50-69 * Walk without assistive devices * Having a Grade I-IV on the RLACFS

Exclusion criteria

* Genetic disorders (Down syndrome). * Age-related diseases like Parkinsonism and Alzheimer disease. * Cerebrovascular accident, dementia, Cerebral palsy * Severe visual impairment. * Medications (sedatives or narcotics)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Rancho Los Amigos Cognitive functional scales4th weekRanchos Los Amigos Scale is the reliable tool for assessing the cognitive function of the patient as the scale score form grade 1 to 8 with ten level descriptive scale where grade 1 have zero response while grade 8 shows the activate participation of the patient with cut off value for 5. It is the most reliable and valid assessment tool
Berg Balance Scale4th weekBerg Balance Scale is the most reliable tool used for the assessment of balance performance among patients having balance problems and disease causing balance issues.
Walking while talking test4th weekWalking while talking is the time measuring tool for assessing the risk of fall and gait performance in the intellectual disable patients as in this test the patient asked to narrate repeated words during walking for 20 feet having ICC= 0.89-0.99
Stair climb test4th weekStair climbing test is the valid tool for assessing the velocity and level of mobility within the time as the patient asked to climb up and down the stairs and therapist record the number of the steps which are taken within the time period having MIC of -0.6 with 95% confidence interval

Countries

Pakistan

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026