-
Scientific Reports Nov 2023Sensorimotor synchronization strategies have been frequently used for gait rehabilitation in different neurological populations. Despite these positive effects on gait,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Sensorimotor synchronization strategies have been frequently used for gait rehabilitation in different neurological populations. Despite these positive effects on gait, attentional processes required to dynamically attend to the auditory stimuli needs elaboration. Here, we investigate auditory attention in neurological populations compared to healthy controls quantified by EEG recordings. Literature was systematically searched in databases PubMed and Web of Science. Inclusion criteria were investigation of auditory attention quantified by EEG recordings in neurological populations in cross-sectional studies. In total, 35 studies were included, including participants with Parkinson's disease (PD), stroke, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), Multiple Sclerosis (MS), Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). A meta-analysis was performed on P3 amplitude and latency separately to look at the differences between neurological populations and healthy controls in terms of P3 amplitude and latency. Overall, neurological populations showed impairments in auditory processing in terms of magnitude and delay compared to healthy controls. Consideration of individual auditory processes and thereafter selecting and/or designing the auditory structure during sensorimotor synchronization paradigms in neurological physical rehabilitation is recommended.
Topics: Humans; Cross-Sectional Studies; Attention; Parkinson Disease; Gait; Electroencephalography
PubMed: 38030693
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-47597-5 -
Frontiers in Neurology 2023The recognition of Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) as a distinct clinical condition that impacts hearing capacity and mental health has gained attention. Although... (Review)
Review
The recognition of Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) as a distinct clinical condition that impacts hearing capacity and mental health has gained attention. Although pure tone audiometry is the gold standard for assessing hearing, it inadequately reflects everyday hearing abilities, especially in challenging acoustic environments. Deficits in speech perception in noise, a key aspect of APD, have been linked to an increased risk of dementia. The World Health Organization emphasizes the need for evaluating central auditory function in cases of mild hearing loss and normal audiometry results. Specific questionnaires play a crucial role in documenting and quantifying the difficulties faced by individuals with APD. Validated questionnaires such as the Children's Auditory Processing Performance Scale, the Fisher's Auditory Problems Checklist, and the Auditory Processing Domains Questionnaire are available for children, while questionnaires for adults include items related to auditory functions associated with APD. This systematic review and meta-analysis identified six questionnaires used for screening and evaluating APD with a total of 783 participants across 12 studies. The questionnaires exhibited differences in domains evaluated, scoring methods, and evaluation of listening in quiet and noise. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that individuals with APD consistently exhibited worse scores compared to healthy controls across all questionnaires. Additionally, comparisons with clinical control groups showed varying results. The study highlights (i) the importance of standardized questionnaires in identifying and assessing APD, aiding in its diagnosis and management, and (ii) the need to use sub-scores as well as overall scores of questionnaires to elaborate on specific hearing and listening situations. There is a need to develop more APD specific questionnaires for the adult population as well as for more focused research on APD diagnosed individuals to further establish the validity and reliability of these questionnaires.
PubMed: 37621857
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1243170 -
European Journal of Physical and... Feb 2020Fatigability, a change in performance according to tasks and circumstances, can contribute to walking limitations in daily life. Walking-related fatigability (WF) has...
INTRODUCTION
Fatigability, a change in performance according to tasks and circumstances, can contribute to walking limitations in daily life. Walking-related fatigability (WF) has been assessed subjectively, but current knowledge on best objective measurement methods is limited. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of objective clinical measurement methods assessing WF in different populations.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Articles were searched in Pubmed and Web Of Science by two independent raters. Studies were included when meeting inclusion criteria of measuring WF objectively in a clinical setting, with no exclusion towards any population. Case studies and reviews were not included in the review (systematic review registration number: PROSPERO - CRD42017074121). In total, 28 articles were included. The study populations were older adults (N.=7), multiple sclerosis (N.=14), spinal muscle atrophy (N.=3), osteoarthritis (N.=3), interstitial lung diseases (N.=1), and myasthenia gravis (N.=1). Data about patient characteristics, walking task, WF formula and interpretation (cut-off values and/or psychometric properties) got extracted from included literature. Every included article got checked for quality and risk of bias.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
WF was mostly measured during longer walking test such as six-minute walking test (6MWT) and 500 or 400-m walking test, by comparing the first and last minute or lap for spatiotemporal or kinematic changes in well-defined formulas. No gold standard is however available yet given different tasks or outcome measures across study populations.
CONCLUSIONS
Longer walking test were most often used, with a preference towards the 6MWT, thereby comparing the changes over the last and first part of the test. Psychometric properties need more documentation before inclusion as experimental outcome.
Topics: Fatigue; Humans; Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care; Psychometrics; Walk Test; Walking
PubMed: 31742368
DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.19.05878-7