Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT03294031

Pilates as an Adjuvant Therapy in Parkinson Disease.

Although Pilates has been proposed as a useful rehabilitation strategy in PD, research on its feasibility and potential effects on the motor symptoms and balance with this population is scarce. Some works have included Pilates as part of combined exercise session interventions, but information concerning their specific effects was not provided. Under these circumstances, this study aims at identifying the effects of adding Pilates as part of a conventional exercise rehabilitation program on the motor symptoms and static balance of PD persons. Participants (n=15) were assigned to a Pilates (PG) or to a conventional exercise group (CG) and performed one land-based and one water-based exercise session per week for 14 weeks. The MDS-UPDRS and a stabilometer were used to assess the impact of the intervention on the participant´s motor symptoms and static balance.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Parkinson Disease Basal Ganglia Diseases Behavior Brain Diseases Central Nervous System Diseases Motor Activity Movement Disorders Nervous System Diseases Neurodegenerative Diseases Parkinsonian Disorders Synucleinopathies

Age range

60 year–85 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Stages 1 through 3 on the Hoehn and Yahr Staging Scale;
  • Stable reaction to anti-Parkinson medication;
  • Not having taken part in any physical exercise program during the month prior to the study.

Exclusion criteria

  • People with PD who were not able to ambulate independently or presented any comorbidities other than PD or any acute illness that would make training inappropriate.

Treatment and study plan

Pilates

Other

Warm-up exercises included Abdominal and costal breathing and Pelvic Clock. Some exercises included in the main part of the mat session were Arm arcs, Curls up, Femur arcs, Shoulder bridge, Leg circles, among others. The main part of the sitting/standing session included in standing position exercises like Standing on one leg with support, Neck rolls, Side leg lift with support and in sitting position Spine stretch 5", Elbows back with hands behind his head, Heel/knee slides, Shoulder drops, Knee folds, among others. In mat sessions, cooling exercises included in standing position Hamstring stretch and Abdominal Breathing and Rest position and in sitting/standing session Stretching and Abdominal Breathing.

Conventional Exercise

Other

All sessions started with a 15-minute warm-up phase based on walking performance and joint mobility exercises. It was followed by a 35-minute second phase, which included low-impact aerobics (music tempo was set at 120 beats per minute), gross motor coordination tasks and balance activities. The final 5-minute phase focused on gentle stretching exercises.

Primary outcomes

  1. Motor impairment.

    Time frame: The participants were assessed one week before starting the program (week #0).

    The Spanish adapted version of the Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) was administered to assess the impact of the intervention on the motor impairment and disability related to PD. The MDS-UPDRS total score ranges from zero to 200, with higher scores indicating a greater impact of PD symptoms.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Anthropometric Measurements.

    Time frame: The participants were assessed one week before starting the program (week #0).

    The height (cm) and weight (kg) of the participants were measured without shoes and in light clothing. The body mass index (BMI) was calculated using the following formula: weight / height2 (kg/m2).

  2. Change from baseline Anthropometric Measurements at week 15.

    Time frame: The participants were assessed one week after the programme was completed (week #15).

    The height (cm) and weight (kg) of the participants were measured without shoes and in light clothing. The body mass index (BMI) was calculated using the following formula: weight / height2 (kg/m2).

  3. Change from week 15 Anthropometric Measurements at week 18 follow-up.

    Time frame: Follow-up assessment was performed four weeks after training ended (week #18).

    The height (cm) and weight (kg) of the participants were measured without shoes and in light clothing. The body mass index (BMI) was calculated using the following formula: weight / height2 (kg/m2).

  4. Static Balance at baseline.

    Time frame: The participants were assessed one week before starting the program (week #0).

    The static balance was evaluated using the TecnoBody Prokin 3 platform. The assessment protocol was developed in a sitting and standing position, with open (OE) and closed (CE) eyes. The participants had three 30-second attempts to perform the position with open and closed eyes and a 60-second interval of active rest between them. The static balance parameters assessed were the centre of pressure of the body in the frontal plane, the centre of pressure of the body in the sagittal plane, the amplitude movement of the centre of pressure in the sagittal plane, the amplitude movement of the centre of pressure in the frontal plane, the average speed of oscillation movement of the centre of pressure in the sagittal plane, the average speed of oscillation movement of the centre of pressure in the frontal plane, the sum of distances of the amount of movement of the centre of pressure, and the displacement area of the centre of pressure.

  5. Change from baseline Static Balance at 15 weeks.

    Time frame: The participants were assessed one week after the programme was completed (week #15).

    The static balance was evaluated using the TecnoBody Prokin 3 platform. The assessment protocol was developed in a sitting and standing position, with open (OE) and closed (CE) eyes. The participants had three 30-second attempts to perform the position with open and closed eyes and a 60-second interval of active rest between them. The static balance parameters assessed were the centre of pressure of the body in the frontal plane, the centre of pressure of the body in the sagittal plane, the amplitude movement of the centre of pressure in the sagittal plane, the amplitude movement of the centre of pressure in the frontal plane, the average speed of oscillation movement of the centre of pressure in the sagittal plane, the average speed of oscillation movement of the centre of pressure in the frontal plane, the sum of distances of the amount of movement of the centre of pressure, and the displacement area of the centre of pressure.

  6. Change from week 15 Static Balance at week 18 follow-up.

    Time frame: Follow-up assessment was performed four weeks after training ended (week #18).

    The static balance was evaluated using the TecnoBody Prokin 3 platform. The assessment protocol was developed in a sitting and standing position, with open (OE) and closed (CE) eyes. The participants had three 30-second attempts to perform the position with open and closed eyes and a 60-second interval of active rest between them. The static balance parameters assessed were the centre of pressure of the body in the frontal plane, the centre of pressure of the body in the sagittal plane, the amplitude movement of the centre of pressure in the sagittal plane, the amplitude movement of the centre of pressure in the frontal plane, the average speed of oscillation movement of the centre of pressure in the sagittal plane, the average speed of oscillation movement of the centre of pressure in the frontal plane, the sum of distances of the amount of movement of the centre of pressure, and the displacement area of the centre of pressure.

  7. Change from baseline Motor Impairment at 15 weeks.

    Time frame: The participants were assessed one week after the programme was completed (week #15).

    The Spanish adapted version of the Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) was administered to assess the impact of the intervention on the motor impairment and disability related to PD. The MDS-UPDRS total score ranges from zero to 200, with higher scores indicating a greater impact of PD symptoms.

  8. Change from week 15 Motor Impairment at week 18 follow-up.

    Time frame: Follow-up assessment was performed four weeks after training ended (week #18).

    The Spanish adapted version of the Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) was administered to assess the impact of the intervention on the motor impairment and disability related to PD. The MDS-UPDRS total score ranges from zero to 200, with higher scores indicating a greater impact of PD symptoms.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of Vigo

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Pilates as an Adjuvant Physical Exercise Therapy in Patients With Parkinson Disease.

Important dates

Study start
2016
Primary completion
2016
Study completion
2016
First posted
Sep 26, 2017
Registry last updated
Sep 26, 2017

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.