Long-term Training Effects of Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation on Gait in Patients With Parkinson's Disease

June 19, 2018 updated by: Michael H. Thaut, University of Toronto

Falls are common among patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD) and are the biggest contributors to loss of independent living, long-term institutionalization, and increased mortality.

The purpose of this study was to explore whether an at-home based Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation (RAS) gait training program will decrease the number of falls in persons with PD with a history of falling. We also evaluated changes in clinical and kinematic parameters used to assess fall risk in this population.

Sixty participants diagnosed with idiopathic PD with at least 2 falls in the past 12 months, were randomly allocated into two groups. The experimental group trained daily with RAS for 24 weeks. The control group also trained daily with RAS, but discontinued training between weeks 8 and 16. During treatment patients walked for 30 minutes in a home based environment with metronome-click embedded music. Changes in clinical and kinematic parameters were assessed at baseline, weeks 8, 16, and 24.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

60

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

14 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Hoehn & Yahr (HY) stage III or IV
  • At least 2 falls in the past 12 months
  • Stable antiparkinsonian medication regime
  • Ability to ambulate independently for at least 50 m.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Other neurological or orthopedic conditions
  • Medically diagnosed hearing loss
  • Dementia (Mini Mental Status Exam score < 24).

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Continuous RAS
The experimental group (continuous treatment) trained daily with RAS for 24 weeks.
The experimental group (continuous treatment) trained daily with Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation (RAS) for 24 weeks. The control group (intermittent treatment) trained with RAS for 8 weeks, discontinued training for 8 weeks, and resumed training with RAS for 8 weeks. During treatment subjects walked for 30 minutes in a home-based environment with metronome-click embedded music downloaded to an MP3 player and listened to either free-field or via headphones. For the first 8 weeks subjects had 3 metronome rates available to choose from: 100, 105, and 110% of internal usual cadence. During the second 8 weeks available rates were 105, 110 and 115%; and during the last 8 weeks 110, 115, 120%. The control group started their last training segment at 105, 110, and 115%, but could request a change to the faster rates if comfortable.
Other Names:
  • Neurologic Music Therapy
Active Comparator: Intermittent RAS
The control group (intermittent treatment) trained with RAS for 8 weeks, discontinued training for 8 weeks, and resumed training with RAS for 8 weeks.
The experimental group (continuous treatment) trained daily with Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation (RAS) for 24 weeks. The control group (intermittent treatment) trained with RAS for 8 weeks, discontinued training for 8 weeks, and resumed training with RAS for 8 weeks. During treatment subjects walked for 30 minutes in a home-based environment with metronome-click embedded music downloaded to an MP3 player and listened to either free-field or via headphones. For the first 8 weeks subjects had 3 metronome rates available to choose from: 100, 105, and 110% of internal usual cadence. During the second 8 weeks available rates were 105, 110 and 115%; and during the last 8 weeks 110, 115, 120%. The control group started their last training segment at 105, 110, and 115%, but could request a change to the faster rates if comfortable.
Other Names:
  • Neurologic Music Therapy

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Fall Index
Time Frame: Change of the number of fall incidents and severity from baseline assessed by the Fall Index 8 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks.
The Fall Index was computed based on self-reports by subjects or caregivers and classified as 1 (incomplete fall, lost balance but stabilized by another person or object), 2 (complete fall, no injuries) or 3 (complete fall, injury, medical attention required). A complete fall was defined as unintentionally coming to the ground with any body part above ankle. Higher Fall Index values indicate higher incidence of falls.
Change of the number of fall incidents and severity from baseline assessed by the Fall Index 8 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Falls Efficacy Scale (FES)
Time Frame: Change in level of concern about falling from baseline assessed by Fear of the Falling Questionnaire/Short FES-1 at 8 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks.
Falls Efficacy Scale (FES) (Tinetti et al 1990) is a 10-item scale to assess fear of falling in older persons. Individuals are asked to rate, on a 10-point scale with zero corresponding to not at all and 10 to completely, how confident he or she felt in performing 10 activities. The scores are added up to calculate a total score that ranges from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate more confidence/less fear.
Change in level of concern about falling from baseline assessed by Fear of the Falling Questionnaire/Short FES-1 at 8 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks.
Berg Balance Scale (BBS)
Time Frame: Change in balance from baseline assessed by Berg Balance Scale at 8 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks.
It is a 14 item list with each item consisting of a five-point ordinal scale ranging from 0 to 4, with 0 indicating the lowest level of function and 4 the highest level of function, and the final measure is the sum of all of the scores.
Change in balance from baseline assessed by Berg Balance Scale at 8 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks.
Timed Up and Go (TUG)
Time Frame: Change in balance and function from baseline assessed by Timed Up and Go at 8 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks.
Measure of function (rise from a chair, walk three meters, turn around, walk back to the chair, and sit down) with correlates to balance and fall risk. A faster time indicates a better functional performance.
Change in balance and function from baseline assessed by Timed Up and Go at 8 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks.
Gait
Time Frame: Change in gait from baseline at 8 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks.
Assessment of gait parameters (velocity, stride length, cadence, ankle dorsiflexion) with a computerized stride analyzer system (B&L Engineering).
Change in gait from baseline at 8 weeks, 16 weeks, and 24 weeks.

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Michael Thaut, PhD, University of Toronto

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

August 1, 2009

Primary Completion (Actual)

August 1, 2011

Study Completion (Actual)

August 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

October 16, 2017

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 16, 2017

First Posted (Actual)

October 20, 2017

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

June 21, 2018

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 19, 2018

Last Verified

June 1, 2018

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

IPD Plan Description

IPD will not be made available to external researchers.

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Continuous Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation

Clinical Trials on Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation (RAS)

Subscribe