Parkinson's DiseasePhase 3Duality-PDNCT01375413
Dual Task Practice in Parkinson's Disease
A Phase 3 study testing physical therapy in people with Parkinson's Disease, run by KU Leuven at 1 site in Belgium.
Trial summary
The ability to perform two or more tasks together is impaired in Parkinson's Disease (PD). Based on pilot work we hypothesize that dual tasking is amenable to training in PD and will not compromise safety. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 40 to 80 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Parkinson's Disease
- What is being tested?
- physical therapy
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 121 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBelgium
- Study dates
- Jun 2011to Oct 2015
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 40 to 80 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Hoehn \& Yahr stage II-III in the on-phase
- Able to walk for 10 minutes continuously
- Dual task interference of at least 5% using a cognitive secondary task
- Without cognitive impairment (MMSE > 24)
- On stable medication
- Diagnosis of Parkinson's disease made by a movement disorders specialist
Who cannot join
- Deep Brain stimulation
- Living alone
- Severe medical conditions affecting gait
- Hearing problems
- Likely to change medication regimen.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Belgium1 site
Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
Leuven, Vlaams Brabant, B-3001
About this study
Official title: Motor Learning in Parkinson's Disease: a Randomized Comparison of Integrated Versus Consecutive Dual Task Training
The ability to perform two or more tasks together is impaired in Parkinson's Disease (PD). Based on pilot work we hypothesize that dual tasking is amenable to training in PD and will not compromise safety. In the proposed study we will therefore collect high level evidence on whether 6 weeks of integrated dual task gait training is more effective than consecutive task practice. The investigators will use a randomized, single blind study design and conduct the same protocols in two academic centers (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen). The investigators intend to test an experimental condition which consists of focused dual task training in the home using a novel program of personalized cognitive tasks. The aim of dual task training is to teach motor-cognitive task integration and achieve optimal levels of automaticity and functionality. The control arm will receive gait practice and separate cognitive training of the same intensity, but offered consecutively. We will test the hypothesis that dual task training (integration) will have more pronounced effects on complex gait than consecutive task training.
Sub-analysis will be conducted on patients with and without freezing of gait. The investigators expect that integrated dual task training may be less effective in patients with freezing, due to the increased fall risk and impaired cognitive profiles.
Overall, this project will provide evidence to support future directions for motor learning and innovative rehabilitation targets.
Read the detailed description
Purpose:
The ability to perform two or more tasks together - for instance walking and talking - is impaired in Parkinson's Disease (PD). As a result, dual tasking might evoke gait deterioration with an increased risk of falling in PD. In the European guideline for physiotherapy, it is therefore recommended to advise PD patients to avoid dual tasking. However, based on clinical experience and pilot work we argue that rather than avoiding, dual tasking should be trained and this may enhance safety.
At present, there is little clinical evidence about the effectiveness of attention-related exercise in PD. The RESCUE-trial showed sustained reductions of dual task interference after a short period of combined single and dual task cued gait training without increasing fall risk. These effects were cue-related and not contrasted with an active control group. Dual task training with a variable locus of attention showed very effective in comparison to single task training in achieving retention and transfer effects in balance-impaired older people. This randomized study also showed that dual tasking led to greater improvements of cognitive function compared to single task intervention. In addition, recent study showed dual task training to be surprisingly effective in mild to moderately affected patients with dementia, who were randomly assigned to dual tasking or unspecific exercise.
Given the positive effects of these clinical studies, the effectiveness of dual task training needs to be urgently addressed in PD patients, in whom both motor and cognitive problems are apparent. The fact that patients with freezing of gait (FOG) are associated with a surplus decline of attention and have a higher fall risk, begs the question whether dual task training is equally effective in this important clinical subgroup. Therefore, we propose to obtain high level evidence on whether dual task gait training is as effective and safe in PD-patients with FOG. The overall purpose of this project is to guide future directions for innovative rehabilitation targets.
Research objectives:
- To determine whether intensive and integrated dual task gait training leads to sustained improvements in complex gait performance and is more effective than consecutive task training. The study will focus on influencing the ability to resist dual task interference, the ability to transfer learning effects to an untrained but related task and the ability to retain the learning increments after a period without training (12 weeks).
- To test whether integrated training of dual task walking is a safe intervention in PD and does not increase fall risk.
- To determine whether disease stage or disease profile (with and without FOG) and cognitive factors predict the effect of dual task training.
Design:
The design will consist of a multicentered single blind randomized controlled trial in which PD patients are either allocated to a control group (Consecutive Task Training, "CTT") or to an experimental group (Integrated Dual Task Training, "IDT"). Patients in both arms of the study will continue their usual care (including standard physiotherapy) as normal. In case patients receive physiotherapy, we will inform the therapists involved and make sure that we ascertain the contents of normal care and avoid overlap. The trial will be conducted in two countries Belgium and the Netherlands, which are similar in terms of language and healthcare facilities.
Randomization:
The overall timeline of the study is 3 years. Subjects will undergo a control period of six weeks without intervention. This allows us to investigate the effects of repeated measures. Subsequently, patients will be randomized to one of the two groups within each center: 1) IDT or 2) CTT. All subjects will participate in an intensive, progressive training protocol consisting of 18 sessions (3 per week for 6 weeks) and up to one hour per session. Assessors will be unaware of group allocation. Randomization will be stratified with respect to subgroups (i.e. with or without FOG and Hoehn \& Yahr stage II and III) to ensure adequate representation and diversity. A computerized block randomization will be performed per centre. Freezers will be defined by a score >1 on the New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire.
Power calculation:
Based on the literature and our previous experience, we anticipate that DTT will improve with an average of 20% and STT with 5% of baseline dual task gait speed (during a novel task). Assuming an alpha of 0.05, we calculated our sample size with dual task gait speed as the main outcome. On the basis of the RESCUE data, (including patients with >5% DT interference) we found a mean dual task gait speed of 0.766 m/s and SD=0.21. Based on these figures we estimated that the total sample size would be N=108 (54 per centre). Incorporating a loss to follow-up of about 5% brings the final figure up to 60 patients per centre to be recruited over a period of two years (N=120).
Intervention:
Integrated dual task training will be conducted at home by a physiotherapist, especially trained in the intervention. It will consist of gait training (straight-line gait, turning and manoeuvring round the house) while using a standardised cognitive exercise protocol with an MP3 player. To address the correct level of learning, the levels of task complexity will be matched to the patient's baseline characteristics, considering the following components: baseline DT interference, previous fall risk and presence of FOG. Given the cognitive deterioration in PD, implying a reduced learning capacity, a fixed priority training (attention priority on both tasks) will be implemented, aimed to improve better and safe walking when distracted by other attention demands. Every session will also include training of a functional dual task, relevant for each patient. Progression of treatment will be standardized. Treatment will consist of 18 sessions over a period of 6 weeks. Homework will be conducted with the partner for safety reasons. Intervention will be additional to regular care (including physiotherapy). A follow-up period of 12 weeks without training will be used to test retention.
Consecutive task training will be conducted at home by a physiotherapist. It will consist of traditional gait training(straight-line gait, turning and maneuvering). Patients will get separate training of cognitive tasks while sitting, using the same program via an MP3 player as described above. Every session will also include training of a functional task, relevant for each patient, but dual tasking will be positively discouraged. Functional training will thus consist of carrying out task components separately. Progression and intensity of treatment will be the same as IDT.
Co-interventions:
During the 6 weeks of IDT or CTT, all other interventions (medication, allied health care etc) will be kept as stable as possible. Any changes in treatment will be monitored.
Subjects:
Patients will be recruited by a movement disorders specialist at each medical center involved. The following clinical descriptive outcomes will be collected: Disease duration, Hoehn \& Yahr stage, Unified Parkinson's Disease rating scale, New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire, Cognitive scores, Beck's Depression Index, and general gait performance (2 minute walk test).
Test procedure:
Testing will be conducted by an independent therapist at each centre. Patients will be followed up over a period of 24 weeks in total. Four testing moments will be foreseen: 1) one baseline test at study entry and the second baseline tests after a 6 week control period without intervention; 2) one test after 6 weeks of training and 3) one test after 12 weeks follow-up without training. All spatiotemporal gait outcomes with and without DT will be measured during normal speed conditions and therefore will require transport of the patients to the gait laboratory. Clinical testing will also be conducted in this environment. Both centers use the same GAITRite Walkway System in their gait laboratory, which is considered to be the 'gold standard' instrumented system for measuring spatiotemporal gait parameters. The untrained secondary task will be an Auditory Stroop task delivered by a wireless headphone. A microphone will record the verbal responses of the patients, allowing detailed measurement of the reaction times of patients' responses. This system is currently used in one of the centers (Katholieke universiteit Leuven). Secondary task performance will be measured during sitting as well as walking.
Tests:
- DT gait performance will be evaluated by measuring gait speed while performing the untrained cognitive task, i.e. the Auditory Stroop.
- Safety will be assessed by determining fall rate ascertained by a weekly telephone call.
- We will also test cognitive performance during a trained dual task (Digit Span Backward) and during a functional task (using a mobile phone). At baseline, the appropriate level of cognitive challenge for each patient will be determined. We will measure gait and secondary task performance separately and calculate dual task interference outcomes.
Other outcomes will be
- Single task gait performance: speed, stride length and cadence;
- Single task cognitive performance (during sitting);
- Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale (measure of function);
- Tests of executive function and attention;
- Freezing of Gait Questionnaire
- ADL scale
- PDQ39 Quality of LIfe scale
- Conditions
- Parkinson's Disease
- Being tested
- physical therapy
- Keywords
- Parkinson's disease, Gait, Rehabilitation, Cognition, Freezing of gait
- Medical subject headings
- Parkinson Disease
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
physical therapyBehavioural
Also called Exercise
Physical therapy consisting of gait training 3 times a week for 6 weeks
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated dual task training | Experimental | Integrated dual task training delivered by a physiotherapist. In this training mode walking practice will be combined with simultaneously carrying out cognitive discrimination, verbal fluency and memory tasks. Receives: Behavioral: physical therapy |
| Consecutive task training | Active comparator | Consecutive task gait training delivered by a physical therapist. In this training mode, walking practice will be conducted separately, focusing on the motor task only. Training of cognitive discrimination, verbal fluency and memory tasks will be done consecutively while the subjects are sitting. Receives: Behavioral: physical therapy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Gait speed during dual task conditions (untrained Auditory Stroop task, trained Digit Span)
Change scores will be calculated, comparing the change over the two baseline timepoints with the change after 6 week intervention. The change between the first baseline timepoint and the last timepoint (24 weeks) will also be compared.
Measured: 24 weeks
Secondary outcomes (2)
Functional Dual task, single task gait measures, cognitive outcomes, Freezing of Gait Questionnaire, Quality of life scores (PDQ39)
Change scores will be calculated, comparing the change over the two baseline timepoints with the change after 6 week intervention. The change between the first baseline timepoint and the last timepoint (24 weeks) will also be compared.
Measured: 24 weeks
Fall rate as determined by weekly phonecall
Change scores will be calculated, comparing the change over the two baseline timepoints with the change after 6 week intervention. The change between the first baseline timepoint and the last timepoint (24 weeks) will also be compared.
Measured: 24 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Jun 2011 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2011
- Primary completionOct 2015
- Study completionOct 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Parkinson's DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 121 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- KU Leuven
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University Medical Center Nijmegen
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Alice Nieuwboer, KU Leuven
- Investigators
- Alice M Nieuwboer, PhD, Principal investigator, KU Leuven
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01375413
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Gossweiler Foundation
- Other IDs
- Duality-Gossweiler
- Acronym
- Duality-PD
- Status last verified
- Oct 2015
- First submitted
- 15 Jun 2011
- Last updated
- 2 Nov 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Strouwen C, Molenaar EA, Keus SH, Munks L, Bloem BR, Nieuwboer A. Test-Retest Reliability of Dual-Task Outcome Measures in People With Parkinson Disease. Phys Ther. 2016 Aug;96(8):1276-86. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20150244. Epub 2016 Feb 4.
PubMed 26847010Strouwen C, Molenaar EA, Keus SH, Munks L, Munneke M, Vandenberghe W, Bloem BR, Nieuwboer A. Protocol for a randomized comparison of integrated versus consecutive dual task practice in Parkinson's disease: the DUALITY trial. BMC Neurol. 2014 Mar 27;14:61. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-14-61.
PubMed 24674594
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 2 Nov 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Motor Learning in Parkinson's Disease: a Randomized Comparison of Integrated Versus Consecutive Dual Task Training
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01375413
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Duality-PD / Gossweiler Foundation
- Conditions
- Parkinson's Disease
- Keywords
- Parkinson's disease, Gait, Rehabilitation, Cognition, Freezing of gait
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 121 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- KU LeuvenUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University Medical Center Nijmegen
- Study start
- Jun 2011
- Primary completion
- Oct 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Oct 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Jun 2011 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The ability to perform two or more tasks together is impaired in Parkinson's Disease (PD). Based on pilot work we hypothesize that dual tasking is amenable to training in PD and will not compromise safety. In the proposed study we will therefore collect high level evidence on whether 6 weeks of integrated dual task gait training is more effective than consecutive task practice. The investigators will use a randomized, single blind study design and conduct the same protocols in two academic centers (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen). The investigators intend to test an experimental condition which consists of focused dual task training in the home using a novel program of personalized cognitive tasks. The aim of dual task training is to teach motor-cognitive task integration and achieve optimal levels of automaticity and functionality. The control arm will receive gait practice and separate cognitive training of the same intensity, but offered consecutively. We will test the hypothesis that dual task training (integration) will have more pronounced effects on complex gait than consecutive task training.
Sub-analysis will be conducted on patients with and without freezing of gait. The investigators expect that integrated dual task training may be less effective in patients with freezing, due to the increased fall risk and impaired cognitive profiles.
Overall, this project will provide evidence to support future directions for motor learning and innovative rehabilitation targets.
Detailed description
Purpose:
The ability to perform two or more tasks together - for instance walking and talking - is impaired in Parkinson's Disease (PD). As a result, dual tasking might evoke gait deterioration with an increased risk of falling in PD. In the European guideline for physiotherapy, it is therefore recommended to advise PD patients to avoid dual tasking. However, based on clinical experience and pilot work we argue that rather than avoiding, dual tasking should be trained and this may enhance safety.
At present, there is little clinical evidence about the effectiveness of attention-related exercise in PD. The RESCUE-trial showed sustained reductions of dual task interference after a short period of combined single and dual task cued gait training without increasing fall risk. These effects were cue-related and not contrasted with an active control group. Dual task training with a variable locus of attention showed very effective in comparison to single task training in achieving retention and transfer effects in balance-impaired older people. This randomized study also showed that dual tasking led to greater improvements of cognitive function compared to single task intervention. In addition, recent study showed dual task training to be surprisingly effective in mild to moderately affected patients with dementia, who were randomly assigned to dual tasking or unspecific exercise.
Given the positive effects of these clinical studies, the effectiveness of dual task training needs to be urgently addressed in PD patients, in whom both motor and cognitive problems are apparent. The fact that patients with freezing of gait (FOG) are associated with a surplus decline of attention and have a higher fall risk, begs the question whether dual task training is equally effective in this important clinical subgroup. Therefore, we propose to obtain high level evidence on whether dual task gait training is as effective and safe in PD-patients with FOG. The overall purpose of this project is to guide future directions for innovative rehabilitation targets.
Research objectives:
- To determine whether intensive and integrated dual task gait training leads to sustained improvements in complex gait performance and is more effective than consecutive task training. The study will focus on influencing the ability to resist dual task interference, the ability to transfer learning effects to an untrained but related task and the ability to retain the learning increments after a period without training (12 weeks).
- To test whether integrated training of dual task walking is a safe intervention in PD and does not increase fall risk.
- To determine whether disease stage or disease profile (with and without FOG) and cognitive factors predict the effect of dual task training.
Design:
The design will consist of a multicentered single blind randomized controlled trial in which PD patients are either allocated to a control group (Consecutive Task Training, "CTT") or to an experimental group (Integrated Dual Task Training, "IDT"). Patients in both arms of the study will continue their usual care (including standard physiotherapy) as normal. In case patients receive physiotherapy, we will inform the therapists involved and make sure that we ascertain the contents of normal care and avoid overlap. The trial will be conducted in two countries Belgium and the Netherlands, which are similar in terms of language and healthcare facilities.
Randomization:
The overall timeline of the study is 3 years. Subjects will undergo a control period of six weeks without intervention. This allows us to investigate the effects of repeated measures. Subsequently, patients will be randomized to one of the two groups within each center: 1) IDT or 2) CTT. All subjects will participate in an intensive, progressive training protocol consisting of 18 sessions (3 per week for 6 weeks) and up to one hour per session. Assessors will be unaware of group allocation. Randomization will be stratified with respect to subgroups (i.e. with or without FOG and Hoehn \& Yahr stage II and III) to ensure adequate representation and diversity. A computerized block randomization will be performed per centre. Freezers will be defined by a score >1 on the New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire.
Power calculation:
Based on the literature and our previous experience, we anticipate that DTT will improve with an average of 20% and STT with 5% of baseline dual task gait speed (during a novel task). Assuming an alpha of 0.05, we calculated our sample size with dual task gait speed as the main outcome. On the basis of the RESCUE data, (including patients with >5% DT interference) we found a mean dual task gait speed of 0.766 m/s and SD=0.21. Based on these figures we estimated that the total sample size would be N=108 (54 per centre). Incorporating a loss to follow-up of about 5% brings the final figure up to 60 patients per centre to be recruited over a period of two years (N=120).
Intervention:
Integrated dual task training will be conducted at home by a physiotherapist, especially trained in the intervention. It will consist of gait training (straight-line gait, turning and manoeuvring round the house) while using a standardised cognitive exercise protocol with an MP3 player. To address the correct level of learning, the levels of task complexity will be matched to the patient's baseline characteristics, considering the following components: baseline DT interference, previous fall risk and presence of FOG. Given the cognitive deterioration in PD, implying a reduced learning capacity, a fixed priority training (attention priority on both tasks) will be implemented, aimed to improve better and safe walking when distracted by other attention demands. Every session will also include training of a functional dual task, relevant for each patient. Progression of treatment will be standardized. Treatment will consist of 18 sessions over a period of 6 weeks. Homework will be conducted with the partner for safety reasons. Intervention will be additional to regular care (including physiotherapy). A follow-up period of 12 weeks without training will be used to test retention.
Consecutive task training will be conducted at home by a physiotherapist. It will consist of traditional gait training(straight-line gait, turning and maneuvering). Patients will get separate training of cognitive tasks while sitting, using the same program via an MP3 player as described above. Every session will also include training of a functional task, relevant for each patient, but dual tasking will be positively discouraged. Functional training will thus consist of carrying out task components separately. Progression and intensity of treatment will be the same as IDT.
Co-interventions:
During the 6 weeks of IDT or CTT, all other interventions (medication, allied health care etc) will be kept as stable as possible. Any changes in treatment will be monitored.
Subjects:
Patients will be recruited by a movement disorders specialist at each medical center involved. The following clinical descriptive outcomes will be collected: Disease duration, Hoehn \& Yahr stage, Unified Parkinson's Disease rating scale, New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire, Cognitive scores, Beck's Depression Index, and general gait performance (2 minute walk test).
Test procedure:
Testing will be conducted by an independent therapist at each centre. Patients will be followed up over a period of 24 weeks in total. Four testing moments will be foreseen: 1) one baseline test at study entry and the second baseline tests after a 6 week control period without intervention; 2) one test after 6 weeks of training and 3) one test after 12 weeks follow-up without training. All spatiotemporal gait outcomes with and without DT will be measured during normal speed conditions and therefore will require transport of the patients to the gait laboratory. Clinical testing will also be conducted in this environment. Both centers use the same GAITRite Walkway System in their gait laboratory, which is considered to be the 'gold standard' instrumented system for measuring spatiotemporal gait parameters. The untrained secondary task will be an Auditory Stroop task delivered by a wireless headphone. A microphone will record the verbal responses of the patients, allowing detailed measurement of the reaction times of patients' responses. This system is currently used in one of the centers (Katholieke universiteit Leuven). Secondary task performance will be measured during sitting as well as walking.
Tests:
- DT gait performance will be evaluated by measuring gait speed while performing the untrained cognitive task, i.e. the Auditory Stroop.
- Safety will be assessed by determining fall rate ascertained by a weekly telephone call.
- We will also test cognitive performance during a trained dual task (Digit Span Backward) and during a functional task (using a mobile phone). At baseline, the appropriate level of cognitive challenge for each patient will be determined. We will measure gait and secondary task performance separately and calculate dual task interference outcomes.
Other outcomes will be
- Single task gait performance: speed, stride length and cadence;
- Single task cognitive performance (during sitting);
- Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale (measure of function);
- Tests of executive function and attention;
- Freezing of Gait Questionnaire
- ADL scale
- PDQ39 Quality of LIfe scale
Study design
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated dual task training | Experimental | Behavioral: physical therapyIntegrated dual task training delivered by a physiotherapist. In this training mode walking practice will be combined with simultaneously carrying out cognitive discrimination, verbal fluency and memory tasks. |
| Consecutive task training | Active comparator | Behavioral: physical therapyConsecutive task gait training delivered by a physical therapist. In this training mode, walking practice will be conducted separately, focusing on the motor task only. Training of cognitive discrimination, verbal fluency and memory tasks will be done consecutively while the subjects are sitting. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 40 to 80 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Hoehn \& Yahr stage II-III in the on-phase
- Able to walk for 10 minutes continuously
- Dual task interference of at least 5% using a cognitive secondary task
- Without cognitive impairment (MMSE > 24)
- On stable medication
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Deep Brain stimulation
- Living alone
- Severe medical conditions affecting gait
- Hearing problems
- Likely to change medication regimen.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| physical therapyAlso: ExercisePhysical therapy consisting of gait training 3 times a week for 6 weeks | Behavioural | Consecutive task training, Integrated dual task training |
Primary outcome
Gait speed during dual task conditions (untrained Auditory Stroop task, trained Digit Span)
Time frame: 24 weeks
Change scores will be calculated, comparing the change over the two baseline timepoints with the change after 6 week intervention. The change between the first baseline timepoint and the last timepoint (24 weeks) will also be compared.
2 secondary outcomes
Functional Dual task, single task gait measures, cognitive outcomes, Freezing of Gait Questionnaire, Quality of life scores (PDQ39)
Time frame: 24 weeks
Fall rate as determined by weekly phonecall
Time frame: 24 weeks
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 2 Nov 2015.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 26847010Strouwen C, Molenaar EA, Keus SH, Munks L, Bloem BR, Nieuwboer A. Test-Retest Reliability of Dual-Task Outcome Measures in People With Parkinson Disease. Phys Ther. 2016 Aug;96(8):1276-86. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20150244. Epub 2016 Feb 4.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 24674594Strouwen C, Molenaar EA, Keus SH, Munks L, Munneke M, Vandenberghe W, Bloem BR, Nieuwboer A. Protocol for a randomized comparison of integrated versus consecutive dual task practice in Parkinson's disease: the DUALITY trial. BMC Neurol. 2014 Mar 27;14:61. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-14-61.
Related trials for Parkinson's Disease
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Genetic Studies of Lysosomal Storage Disorders
Lysosomal Storage Disorders, Gaucher Disease
RecruitingObservational study
Evaluation and Treatment of Neurosurgical Disorders
Neurologic Disorders
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
A Pilot Study to Investigate the Safety and Clinical Activity of Avelumab (MSB0010718C) in Thymoma and Thymic Carcinoma After Progression on Platinum-Based Chemotherapy
Thymoma, Thymic Carcinoma
RecruitingPhase 1/2
KEYMAKER-U01 Substudy 01A: Efficacy and Safety Study of Pembrolizumab (MK-3475) With or Without Chemotherapy When Used With Investigational Agents in Treatment-naïve Participants With Stage IV Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) (MK-3475-01A/KEYMAKER-U01A)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung
RecruitingObservational study
KEYMAKER-U01 Umbrella Master Study: Studies of Investigational Agents With Either Pembrolizumab (MK-3475) Alone or With Pembrolizumab PLUS Chemotherapy in Participants With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) (MK-3475-U01/KEYMAKER-U01)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Alice M Nieuwboer, PhD principal investigator
KU Leuven
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing physical therapy in people with Parkinson's Disease, run by KU Leuven at 1 site in Belgium.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 2 Nov 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Belgium. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Gait speed during dual task conditions (untrained Auditory Stroop task, trained Digit Span) (time frame: 24 weeks). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01375413, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 2 Nov 2015; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 30 Oct 2026.