Parkinson Disease
Conditions
Interventions
Allocation, randomization, evaluation and intervention procedures were performed by independent researchers who did not have access to each other's work.
Initially, 26 patients were recruited, 20 of w
Other
E02.621.820
Sponsors
Universidade Federal da Paraíba-
Universidade Estadual da Paraíba
Eligibility
Age
35 Years to 80 Years
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: The study included individuals with clinical diagnosis of PD, of both sexes, with clinical diagnosis of PD, with staging of PD between 1 and 3 on the Hoehn and Modified Yahr scale, who are assisted by SUS, and who agree to participate in the study.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Excluded from this study were: Individuals with PD associated with another chronic neurodegenerative disease; diagnosed with parkinsonian syndrome; individuals with a history of epilepsy; carriers of another disabling condition; and to participate in other physical therapy interventions; have previous experience with Kinect; individuals with functional deficit that makes it impossible to perform the practice proposed by Kinect.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| An increase in motor functional capacity is expected through the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale - UPDRS, from the finding of a variation with a significant difference (p <0.05) in pre and post intervention measurements. It is expected an increase in cognitive capacity verified through the Scales for Outcomes of Parkinson's Disease - Cognition - SCOPA-Cog, from the finding of a variation with a significant difference (p <0.05) in the pre and post intervention measurements.;Through UPDRS, the motor functional capacity was evaluated. In the item falls of the evaluation instrument the results showed a significant improvement, with a value of p = 0.0038. An intergroup analysis was developed to identify in which groups there was improvement and it was identified that the Active Stimulation Group (GEA) and the Active Stimulation Group (p = 0.033) and median of 1 (0.25-1) and 0 (0-0) in the reevaluation, a result similar to that found in the Comparison between GEA and Gamete Therapy Simulated Stimulation Group reiterating the positive effect of active stimulation and gamotherapy for falls in individuals with PD -Regarding gait, the results presented were assertive for the combination therapy with active rTMS when compared to the simulated stimulation group. We observed a value of p = 0.0069 for gait, when comparing the GEAG and Simulated Stimulation Group (GES), we also observed the following values of p = 0.0023, median of 0 (0-1) for the GEAG and median 1 (1-2) for GES. -In the rapid and alternate movement of the hands, the individuals presented significant difference before and after the intervention with the value of p = 0.012 and for the comparison between the group. The GEAG and GES presented p = 0.019 with a median of 0 (0-1) for GEAG and a median of 2 (1-2) for GES;The cognitive capacity of the study subjects was performed using the SCOPA Scale. -For the attention domain of the scalara the results presented a significance level with the value of p = 0.014 | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| No Secondary Outcomes Expected | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Public ContactMaíra Lopes
Universidade Federal da Paraiba
Outcome results
None listed