Evaluating a Speech-Specific and a Computerized Step-Training-Specific Rhythmic Intervention in Parkinson's Disease: A Cross-Over, Multi-Arms Parallel Study.
Anne Dorothée Rösch, Ethan Taub, Ute Gschwandtner and 1 others
PMID 36188780WHAT IT FOUND
Both rhythmic speech and rhythmic step training improved speech and gait in Parkinson's patients, with no difference between the two.
Untreated patients worsened over six months. Neither intervention restored performance to healthy control levels.
Key findings
01Rhythmic speech therapy improved speech rhythm, velocity, respiration, articulation, and intelligibility, with gains maintained at six months except for gait parameters.
02Rhythmic step training improved walking velocity, step length, and speech rhythm/velocity, with gains in walking and speaking velocity, syllables per inspiration, step length, and TUG maintained at six months.
03Untreated Parkinson's patients showed significant decline in speech variables and deterioration in gait tasks over six months, consistent with disease progression.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The rBMT group was small (n=10), reducing power for some comparisons. Speech assessments used only read-aloud samples, not spontaneous speech. Gait assessments used a short 6-meter walkway, limiting detection of variability. Carry-over effects cannot be fully ruled out despite a 6-month washout. Effects on broader functional measures like UPDRS or quality of life were not captured. The study did not examine how factors like age, education, or medication dosage influenced outcomes.
Declared interests
Funded by the Bangerter-Rhyner-Stiftung, which had no role in study design, execution, or data interpretation. Author PF received grants from the same foundation.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume either intervention restores function to healthy levels or halts disease progression. Both improved specific parameters but never reached healthy control performance, and untreated patients declined significantly over 6 months.