Bicycling for Rehabilitation of Persons With Parkinson Disease: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Exercise is beneficial for persons with Parkinson disease (PwPD). The overarching purpose of this scoping review was to provide guidance to clinicians and scientists regarding current evidence for bicycling exercise for PwPD. A scoping review was conducted to examine the heterogeneous literature on stationary bicycling for PwPD to reduce motor symptoms and body function structure impairments, improve activities and motor performance, and reduce disease severity. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines were followed. PubMed, CINAHL, and PEDro were searched from inception to January 23, 2023. Articles reporting original data on relevant outcome measures were included. Search results were screened and articles were extracted. Data were analyzed quantitatively with percentages of significant and clinically meaningful findings and qualitatively to extract themes. RESULTS: Bicycling was categorized using bicycle types (assisted, nonassisted) and training modes (speed, aerobic, force). A high percentage of the 34 studies showed statistical significance for reducing motor symptoms (83%), body function structure impairments (78%), disease severity (82%), and improving activities (gait 72%, balance 60%). Clinically meaningful findings were achieved in 71% of the studies for reduction in disease severity and in 50% for improving gait. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The literature on bicycling for PwPD has evolved from speed to aerobic studies. The terminology describing types of bicycling was simplified. Of all the outcomes reported, reduction of disease severity achieved the highest frequency of clinical meaningful improvements. Bicycling was comparable with other forms of aerobic training for walking speed and endurance. Opportunities for translation to practice and research are presented.

Student and Faculty Perspectives on the Usefulness and Usability of a Digital Health Educational Tool to Teach Standardized Assessment of Persons After Stroke: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The VSTEP Examination Suite is a collection of evidence-based standardized assessments for persons after stroke. It was developed by an interdisciplinary team in collaboration with clinician users. It consists of 5 standardized assessments: 2 performance-based tests using the Kinect camera (Microsoft Corp) to collect kinematics (5-Time Sit-to-Stand and 4-Square Test); 2 additional performance-based tests (10-Meter Walk Test and 6-Minute Walk Test); and 1 patient-reported outcome measure, the Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the development of the VSTEP Examination Suite and its evaluation as an educational tool by physical therapy students and faculty to determine its usefulness and usability. METHODS: A total of 6 students from a Doctor of Physical Therapy program in the United States and 6 faculty members who teach standardized assessments in different physical therapy programs from the United States and Israel were recruited by convenience sampling to participate in the study. They interacted with the system using a talk-aloud procedure either in pairs or individually. The transcripts of the sessions were coded deductively (by 3 investigators) with a priori categories of usability and usefulness, and comments were labeled as negative or positive. The frequencies of the deductive themes of usefulness and usability were tested for differences between faculty and students using a Wilcoxon rank sum test. A second round of inductive coding was performed by 3 investigators guided by theories of technology adoption, clinical reasoning, and education. RESULTS: The faculty members' and students' positive useful comments ranged from 83% (10/12) to 100%. There were no significant differences in usefulness comments between students and faculty. Regarding usability, faculty and students had the lowest frequency of positive comments for the 10-Meter Walk Test (5/10, 50%). Students also reported a high frequency of negative comments on the 4-Square Test (9/21, 43%). Students had a statistically significantly higher number of negative usability comments compared with faculty (W=5.7; P=.02), specifically for the 5-Time Sit-to-Stand (W=5.3; P=.02). Themes emerged related to variable knowledge about the standardized tests, value as a teaching and learning tool, technology being consistent with clinical reasoning in addition to ensuring reliability, expert-to-novice clinical reasoning (students), and usability. CONCLUSIONS: The VSTEP Examination Suite was found to be useful by both faculty and students. Reasons for perceived usefulness had some overlap, but there were also differences based on role and experience. Usability testing revealed opportunities for technology refinement. The development of the technology by interdisciplinary teams and testing with multiple types of users may increase adoption.