Skip to content
naulon

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 20, 2026.

Effect of rhythmic auditory cueing on parkinsonian gait: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Shashank Ghai, Ishan Ghai, Gerd Schmitz and 1 more

Scientific Reports · 2018 · Meta-analysis · CC BY

doi:10.1038/s41598-017-16232-5

Abstract

The use of rhythmic auditory cueing to enhance gait performance in parkinsonian patients’ is an emerging area of interest. Different theories and underlying neurophysiological mechanisms have been suggested for ascertaining the enhancement in motor performance. However, a consensus as to its effects based on characteristics of effective stimuli, and training dosage is still not reached. A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to analyze the effects of different auditory feedbacks on gait and postural performance in patients affected by Parkinson’s disease. Systematic identification of published literature was performed adhering to PRISMA guidelines, from inception until May 2017, on online databases; Web of science, PEDro, EBSCO, MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE and PROQUEST. Of 4204 records, 50 studies, involving 1892 participants met our inclusion criteria. The analysis revealed an overall positive effect on gait velocity, stride length, and a negative effect on cadence with application of auditory cueing. Neurophysiological mechanisms, training dosage, effects of higher information processing constraints, and use of cueing as an adjunct with medications are thoroughly discussed. This present review bridges the gaps in literature by suggesting application of rhythmic auditory cueing in conventional rehabilitation approaches to enhance motor performance and quality of life in the parkinsonian community.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 20, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Introduction

Susceptibility to fall grows rapidly amongst elderly and patients with neurological deficits–. The impairments in neuromuscular functioning promotes instability,, weakness, reduces physical activity, further leading to musculoskeletal deformities and a higher predisposition to fall. Injuries related to such instabilities inflict heavy costs at both individual and economic levels, increase dependency, social isolation and affects the quality of life,. Neurological disorders such as parkinsonism presents itself with impairments in motor functions exhibiting characteristics such as, akinesia, chorea, hypokinesia, bradykinesia, motor blocks, rigidity, and problems with generation of cyclic movements, further leading to “freezing” instances,. Jankovic and Tolosa suggests the degeneration of dopaminergic cells in substantia nigra in basal ganglia, which might result in its impaired excitatory output and affect its functioning (autonomic control of movement planning, scaling and initiation). Likewise, ageing together with parkinsonism results in rigorous denervation and re-innervation due to progressive reduction in functional motor units in spinal cord and myelinated ventral root fibers. Together, these neurological dysfunctions impair the ability to execute and maintain autonomic motor tasks such as, posture and gait.

Research also suggests a “fear” related stability modification in gait, postural performance for such fall prone population groups, possibly leading to a range of spatiotemporal and kinematic modifications. For instance, reduction in gait velocity, stride length, increase in double limb support,,, and stride-to-stride fluctuation have been extensively reported. This compensatory effort to develop gait patterns that are resistant to external perturbations leads to poor static and dynamic stability,. Practically, these changes might impair an individual’s ability to pass safely through high stress situations constrained by space or time, such as escalators, traffic signals,, leading to an increased predisposition to fall. Studies have suggested that this modification in gait patterns is due to an alleviation in “internal” conscious attention towards autonomic control, which adversely impacts proprioception and autonomic functioning possibly because of movement specific re-investment,,,. The theory suggests that directing attention internally to control autonomic movements such as gait, can have an adverse impact on its performance. The theory further adds that aging, neurological ailment and injuries, are common conditions that promote movement specific reinvestment. Such fall-prone population groups have a differential cortical activation pattern, which could possibly be linked with changes in task prioritization and conscious attention while carrying out cognitive or motor tasks. Moreover, electromyographic analysis has revealed enhanced variability in motor unit recruitments that adversely impacts the execution of automated and voluntary motor tasks. Likewise, limitations in execution of functional activities of daily living tasks have also been extensively reported–.

Common treatment strategies to curb motor dysfunctions in parkinsonism include training with virtual-reality, biofeedback, physical/occupational therapy, physical exercise, dance, treadmill, external sensory feedback, and dual-task training. Likewise, pharmacological intervention with psychoactive drug such as levodopa, dopamine agonists, monoamine oxidase type B inhibitors, have been reported to be effective short-term for managing motor symptoms, such as bradykinesia, tremors. However their effectiveness in managing gait and postural dysfunctions in long-term is largely debated,.

Spaulding et al. argued that the lack of adequate sensory information in patients with parkinsonism plays a destructive role in autonomic motor functioning. Therefore, motor performance in parkinsonian patients might benefit from additional sensory information. Several studies have analyzed the effects of augmented external auditory, visual and tactile feedback on performance–. Nevertheless, studies have suggested the predominant role of auditory information as compared to its counterparts,. Predominantly auditory cortex has been reported to perceive stimuli with shorter reaction times (20–50 ms) as compared to its visual or tactile counterparts,–. Further, the auditory cortex possesses rich connectivity to motor centers from spinal cord extending towards brainstem, cortical and subcortical structures–. Thereby, allowing strong cross-sensory impacts of auditory signal characteristics, such as frequency, timbre, on motor execution. Consequently, several types of external auditory feedback techniques have been analyzed in the literature, such as rhythmic auditory cueing, patterned sensory enhancement,, and real-time auditory feedback. However, rhythmic auditory cueing is most widely studied, with respect to motor performance post parkinsonism, stroke, cerebral palsy,, and more,–. Rhythmic auditory cueing is defined as a medium of repetitive isosynchronous beats applied with an aim to synchronize motor execution with a rhythm,. The underlying mechanisms for attaining benefits in the motor domain are suggested to be multifactorial,. The auditory cueing has been suggested to modulate neuromagnetic β oscillations, enhance biological motion perception,, promote motor imagery,, reducing shape variability in musculoskeletal activation patterns, mediate cortical reorganization, neural-plasticity, supressing movement specific re-investment, and more,.

We identified high quality systematic reviews analysing the effects of external auditory cueing on Parkinsonism,,. However, the meta-analysis due to extremely strict inclusion criteria allowed the inclusion of only randomized controlled trials for statistical analysis, and not for a joint qualitative analysis,. Moreover, findings from the meta-analysis of Spaulding et al. were interpreted without the presence of any heterogeneity test in between the studies. Similarly, limitations concerning statistical analysis were observed for Rocha et al.. Lim et al. and Nombela et al. performed excellent quality narrative reviews, but the lack of statistical analysis doesn’t allow to draw firm conclusions. Moreover, none of the review studies analysed the effects of different types of tempo, different signal characteristics, training dosage, and dual-task performance with rhythmic auditory cueing. Therefore, we attempted to develop a state of knowledge for the benefit of parkinsonian patients and medical practitioners, where both qualitative and quantitative data from good quality studies can be interpreted. Moreover, to the best of our knowledge, up to now, no review has elucidated the effects of dual tasks, fast/slow paced stimuli, and the precise training dosage of rhythmic auditory cueing on spatiotemporal gait parameters in Parkinson’s disease. This present review for the first time, conducted a systematic review in combination with a meta-analysis to determine the effects of rhythmic auditory cueing among parkinsonian patients.

Methods

This review was conducted according to the guidelines outlined in Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis: The PRISMA statement.

Data sources and search strategy

Academic databases Web of science, PEDro, EBSCO, MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE and PROQUEST were searched from inception until July 2017. A sample search strategy has been provided in (Table 1).

Data extraction

Upon selection for review, the following data were extracted from each article; author, date of publication, sample size, sample description (gender, age, health status), disease duration, intervention, characteristics of auditory cueing, dual-task, outcome measures, results, and conclusions. The data were then summarized and tabulated (Supplementary Table 1).

The inclusion criteria for the studies was (i) Randomized controlled trials, cluster randomized controlled trials or controlled clinical trials; (ii) Studies reporting reliable and valid spatiotemporal gait parameters (iii) Studies including static/dynamic aspects of gait/postural stability (iv) Studies scoring ≥4 in PEDro methodological quality scale; (v) Experiments conducted on human participants; (vi) Published in a peer-reviewed academic journal; (vii) Articles published in English, German and Korean languages.

Quality and risk of bias assessment

The quality of the studies was assessed using the PEDro methodological quality scale. The scale consists of 11 items addressing external validity, internal validity, and interpretability and can detect potential bias with fair to good reliability, and validity. A blinded rating of the methodological quality of the studies was carried out by the primary reviewer (SG). Ambiguous issues were discussed with second and third reviewers (IG, GS, AOE) and consensus was reached. Included studies were rated according to scoring of 9–10, 6–8 and 4–5, and were interpreted as “excellent”, “good” and “fair” quality studies, respectively. Inadequate randomization, non-blinding of assessors, no intention to treat analysis and no measurement of compliance were considered as major threats for biasing.

Data Analysis

This systematic review also included a meta-analysis approach to develop a better understanding of the incorporated interventions. The presence and lack of heterogeneity asserted the use of either random or fixed effect meta-analysis. A narrative synthesis of the findings structured around the intervention, population characteristics; methodological quality (Supplementary Table 1) and the type of outcome are provided. Likewise, summaries of intervention effects for each study were provided in a tabular format (Supplementary Table 1). A meta-analysis was conducted between pooled homogenous studies using CMA (Comprehensive meta-analysis V 2.0, USA). Heterogeneity between the studies was assessed using I2 statistics. The data in this review were systematically distributed and for each available variable pooled, dichotomous data were analyzed and forest plots with 95% confidence intervals are reported. The effect sizes were adjusted and reported as Hedge’s g. Thresholds for interpretation of effect sizes were as follows; a standard mean effect size of 0 means no change, negative effect size means a negative change, mean effect size of 0.2 considered a small effect, 0.5 a medium effect and 0.8 a large effect. Interpretation of heterogeneity via I2 statistics was as; 0%, 25%, 75% as negligible, moderate and substantial heterogeneity, respectively. Meta-analysis reports indicating heterogeneity among studies were evaluated to determine the reason of heterogeneity, and the included studies were then pooled separately and analyzed again. The alpha level of 0.05 was adopted.

Characteristics of included studies

Our initial search yielded a total of 4794 studies, which on implementing our inclusion/exclusion criteria, were reduced to fifty (Fig. 1). Data from the included studies have been summarized in (Supplementary Table 1). Of the fifty included studies, seven were randomized controlled trials, and forty-four were controlled clinical trials.

Participants

A total of 1892 participants were analyzed in the incorporated studies. In the included studies, forty-eight studies incorporated mix gender patients. Two studies incorporated only male participants,. Two studies didn’t specify the gender of the included participants,. The included studies provided data on 1892 participants (n = 745 females/1089 males). Descriptive statistics relating to the age (mean ± standard deviation) of the participants were tabulated across the studies. In addition, the age of participants was mentioned in range by six studies–, and only a mean value was provided by two studies,. Disease duration of parkinsonian patients have been mentioned (see Supplementary Table 1).

Risk of bias

To reduce the risks of bias, studies scoring ≥4 on PEDro were included in the review. Moreover, the limitation of research protocols to be included in the review was limited to gold standard randomized controlled trials, cluster randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials. The individual scores attained by the studies using the PEDro scale have been reported (Supplementary Tables 1 and 2). The average PEDro score for the fifty included studies was computed to be 5.4 out of 10, indicating fair-quality of the overall studies. Seven studies scored 8, three scored 7, twelve studies scored 6, thirteen studies scored 5, and seventeen studies scored 4. Publication bias was analyzed by plotting a Hedge’s g against standard error (Fig. 2). Asymmetries concerning mean in the funnel plot might suggest bias (either positive or negative). Risk of bias across the studies has been demonstrated in (Fig. 3).

Outcomes

The results suggest clear evidence for a positive impact of rhythmic auditory cueing on spatiotemporal gait parameters amongst parkinsonian patients. An enhancement in gait parameters were also observed when rhythmic auditory cueing was introduced with biological variability,, and music,,–. In the included fifty studies, one study reported enhancements (p > 0.05), two studies reported negligible effects,, one study reported significant reduction of rhythmic auditory cueing on spatiotemporal gait parameters. Forty-six studies reported significant enhancements in primary spatiotemporal gait parameters while receiving rhythmic auditory cueing.

Meta-analysis report

The evaluation of research studies via meta-analysis requires strict inclusion criteria to efficiently limit the heterogeneity. However, among the pooled group of studies post strict inclusion criteria, some amount of unexplained heterogeneity was still observed. Thereafter, sub-group analyses were performed among homogenous studies to exclude and evaluate the cause of heterogeneity. The evaluated parameters were the spatio-temporal gait parameters such as, cadence, stride length, gait velocity, double limb support duration, and turn time. Analyses were also conducted to evaluate the effects of dual-task conditions, the effects of different training durations, presence/lack of medication, early/late phase of treatment, presence of treadmill, and different tempi at which rhythmic auditory cueing was provided on gait parameters. We included a generalized group analysis combined for all the pooled studies. A separate analysis in addition to clinical controlled trials was performed for high quality randomized controlled trails, for allowing a better interpretation of the direction and magnitude of effects. The main reason for not including the statistical approach within the studies was due to major differences in between assessment methods, patient characteristics, auditory stimuli and lack of descriptive statistics within the manuscript. However, attempts were made to retrieve data from respective corresponding co-authors.

Gait velocity

Gait velocity was analyzed among thirty-five studies. Additional sub-group data were extracted from thirteen included studies,,,,,,–. In the additional analyses, two studies analyzed early and late treatment groups,. Two studies analyzed normal and treadmill gait performance,. Six studies compared cueing between fast and slow tempo,,,,,. Five studies analyzed the effects with only fast paced–, and two with only slow paced tempo,. Seven studies analyzed cueing at slow tempo,,,,,,. The fast/slow tempo in the included studies was determined by keeping the patient’s preferred cadence as reference. Three studies analyzed patients in “on” and “off” stages of medications,,, signifying the presence and absence of medications, respectively. A positive effect here refers to enhancement in gait velocity, and a negative effect refers to reduction in gait velocity.

The analysis of studies revealed (Fig. 4) a small effect size in the positive domain (g: 0.23, 95% C.I: 0.1 to 0.3). Substantial heterogeneity was observed in between the studies (I2: 87.4%, p > 0.01). Further, sub-group analyses were conducted among homogenous studies to explore heterogeneity. An analysis between “on” and “off” medications patients (Supplementary Figures 1 and 2), revealed a positive small effect size for “off” group with negligible heterogeneity (g: 0.43, 95% C.I: 0.11 to 0.75, I2: 18.8%, p = 0.29), and positive medium effect size for “on” group with negligible heterogeneity (g: 0.55, 95% C.I: 0.23 to 0.87, I2: 0.0%, p = 0.44). A sub-group analysis for treadmill training groups (Supplementary Figure 3) revealed a positive large effect size with negligible heterogeneity (g: 1.0, 95% C.I: 0.33 to 1.67, I2: 24.6%, p = 0.24). A sub group analysis between “fast” and “slow” externally paced auditory cueing (Supplementary Figure 4), revealed a positive medium effect for the “fast” group with negligible heterogeneity (g: 0.7, 95% C.I: 0.50 to 0.89, I2: 0.0%, p = 0.44), and a negative small effect for the “slow” group (Supplementary Figure 5) with negligible heterogeneity (g: −0.24, 95% C.I: 10.51 to 0.19, I2: 23.53%, p = 0.24). Further, twenty-one studies analyzing the effects of a simple rhythmic auditory cueing were analyzed (Supplementary Figure 6). The sub-analysis revealed a positive small effect size (g: 0.05, 95% C.I: −0.07 to 0.17, I2: 86.4%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. The analysis revealed two main types of sub-groups analyzing the effects of rhythmic auditory cueing with and without training. The analysis of ten studies analysing the direct effects of rhythmic auditory cueing i.e. without training (Supplementary Figure 7) revealed a negative small effect size (g: −0.34, 95% C.I: −0.5 to −0.18, I2: 85.9%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. The studies were then categorized according to the disease duration of parkinsonian patients in the studies i.e. >9 years or <9 years. Six studies evaluated the effects of rhythmic auditory cueing on gait performance, with patients having mean disease duration <9 years. The analysis revealed a positive small effect size (g: 0.16, 95% C.I: −0.12 to 0.44, I2: 0%, p = 0.56) with negligible heterogeneity. The studies analysing severe parkinsonian patients i.e. >9 years of disease duration revealed a negative small effect size (g: −0.37, 95% C.I: −0.62 to −0.13, I2: 91%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. Upon further evaluation of heterogeneity in the sub-group we observed that the experimental procedures differed considerably between each other. For instance, Chen et al. analysed gait performance during gait turning, Arias and Cudeiro utilized a varied range of frequency that differed from other studies, and Rochester et al. utilized a complex functional task that required the patients to perform a sitting to stand and carrying a tray. Therefore, a further sub-analysis was not carried out.

A sub-group analysis for thirteen studies analysing the effects of training with rhythmic auditory cueing (Supplementary Figure 8), revealed a positive medium effect size (g: 0.63, 95% C.I: 0.49 to 0.76, I2: 74.1%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. Further, upon sub-group analysis to reveal the cause of heterogeneity we excluded Frazzitta et al. because the patients in their study had on average a longer disease duration (13.2 ± 4.1 years) than the patients from other studies. Additionally, Dalla Bella et al. was excluded from further analysis. The study’s training regime differed from the other studies i.e. rhythmic auditory cueing with ±10% modulation of pace according to preferred cadence. Moreover, the training included a hand tapping task concurrently with gait training. The analysis after excluding these studies revealed a positive medium effect size with moderate heterogeneity (g: 0.64, 95% C.I: 0.37 to 0.92, I2: 36.08%, p = 0.34). Moreover, an additional analysis of training duration was performed (more or less than 45 min). The analysis for thirteen studies included a treatment duration for less than 45 minutes (Supplementary Figure 9) revealed a positive medium effect size with substantial heterogeneity (g: 0.61, 95% C.I: 0.48 to 0.74, I2: 69.3%, p < 0.01). Further, exclusion of Chaiwanichsiri et al., Frazzitta et al. was done as both the studies incorporated treadmill training and a training duration of 20 minutes, and Harro et al. as the authors only included only one training session per week, whilst the others included more than 3 sessions per week. The analysis for 30–45 min of duration (Supplementary Figure 10), revealed a positive medium effect size with moderate heterogeneity (g: 0.52, 95% C.I: 0.38 to 0.66, I2: 33.8%, p > 0.05). The analysis for 20 min of duration (Supplementary Figure 11), revealed a positive large effect size with substantial heterogeneity (g: 1.09, 95% C.I: 0.7 to 1.47, I2: 80.9%, p < 0.01). The studies however differed considerably from one another as, Frazzitta et al. included parkinsonian patients in advanced stage of disease, as compared Chaiwanichsiri et al. where patients were in early stages. The two studies analyzing the effects of training in ling duration i.e. more than 45 minutes were considerably different as del Olmo and Cudeiro utilized rhythmic auditory cueing with an instruction to perform faster gait, and while carrying out a manual task, whereas del Olmo et al. did not incorporate such technique. A sub-group analysis based on the number of weeks the patients received treatment i.e. less or more than 5 weeks was performed. Analysis for patients receiving treatment for less than 5 weeks (Supplementary Figure 12) revealed a positive medium effect size with substantial heterogeneity (g: 0.73, 95% C.I: 0.31 to 1.14, I2: 21.3%, p > 0.05). Likewise, for patients receiving treatment for more than 5 weeks (Supplementary Figure 13) revealed a positive small effect size with negligible heterogeneity (g: 0.46, 95% C.I: 0.2 to 0.72, I2: 0%, p > 0.05).

Randomized controlled trials

A sub-group analysis on the included randomized controlled trials was performed (Supplementary Figure 14). Two studies analyzed early and late intervention groups,. Three studies involved a training regime with rhythmic auditory cueing,,. One study analyzed immediate effects of rhythmic auditory cueing on gait. The analysis revealed a positive small effect for the group with substantial heterogeneity (g: 0.25, 95% C.I: 0.11 to 0.40, I2: 73.5%, p = 0.001).

A sub-group analysis between “early” and “late” treatment groups revealed a positive small effect size for “early” group (Supplementary Figure 15) with negligible heterogeneity (g: 0.11, 95% C.I: −0.16 to 0.39, I2: 0.0%, p = 0.88), and similar small effect size for “late” group (Supplementary Figure 16) with negligible heterogeneity (g: 0.11, 95% C.I: −0.16 to 0.39, I2: 0.0%, p = 0. 45). A sub-group analysis between de Bruin et al. and Harro et al. revealed a positive large effect size with substantial heterogeneity (g: 0.97, 95% C.I: 0.29 to 1.66, I2: 93.35%, p < 0.01). The training program differed between the studies, de Bruin et al. trained their patients for at least 3 sessions per week, whereas Harro et al. performed only one training session per week. Gait velocity under dual-task condition was analyzed amongst nine studies. The specifics of dual-tasks have been mentioned (Supplementary Table 1). The analysis (Supplementary Figure 17) revealed a positive small effect size (g: 0.38, 95% C.I: 0.09 to 0.66, I2: 9.95%, p > 0.05) with negligible heterogeneity.

Stride length

Stride length was analyzed amongst thirty-four studies. Additional sub-group data was extracted from fourteen included studies. A positive effect here refers to enhancement in stride length, and a negative effect refers to reduction in stride length. The combined analysis revealed (Fig. 5) a positive small effect size (g: 0.42, 95% C.I: 0.35 to 0.5, I2: 85.05%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. A sub-group analysis in between “off” and “on” medication groups was performed among three studies,,. The analysis for “on” group (Supplementary Figure 18), revealed a large effect size in positive domain (g: 0.77, 95% C.I: 0.45 to 1.1, I2: 43.6%, p = 0.16) with moderate heterogeneity. Likewise, analysis for “off” group (Supplementary Figure 19), revealed a large effect size in positive domain (g: 0.85, 95% C.I: 0.49 to 1.2, I2: 51%, p = 0.12) with marginally moderate heterogeneity. This heterogeneity could possibly be attributed to Chester et al., as the authors utilized a different tempo for rhythmic auditory cueing as compared to the other two counterparts. Post exclusion the meta-analysis revealed large effect size for both “on” and “off” in positive domain (g: 0.86, 95% C.I: 0.52 to 1.2, I2: 0%, p = 0.64), (g: 0.96, 95% C.I: 0.59 to 1.34, I2: 0%, p = 0.39), with negligible heterogeneity, respectively.

A further analysis differentiated fast and slow-paced stimuli with respect to the patient’s preferred cadence. Seven studies compared the effects between fast and slow paced rhythmic cueing,,,,–, whereas four studies analyzed the effects of only fast paced cueing,,,. Analysis for fast-paced stimuli among eleven studies (Supplementary Figure 20), revealed a positive small effect size (g: 0.27, 95% C.I: 0.09 to 0.4, I2: 69%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. Chester et al. was excluded from further analysis as the authors evaluated the effects of fast and slow-paced stimuli on patients with different stages of severity. Likewise, Lopez et al. utilized a tempo faster than the other studies i.e. +25% of preferred cadence, hence was also excluded. Thereafter, a positive small effect size (g: 0.3, 95% C.I: 0.08 to 0.52, I2: 0%, p = 0.7) with negligible heterogeneity was observed. Similarly, for the slow-paced stimuli five studies were evaluated (Supplementary Figure 21) a positive small effect size (g: 0.43, 95% C.I: 0.18 to 0.69, I2: 83.2%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity was observed. After excluding (Chester et al., 2006) we observed a positive medium effect size (g: 0.69, 95% C.I: 0.35 to 1.03, I2: 20.03%, p = 0.29) with negligible heterogeneity. Studies analyzing only the effects of un-modulated rhythmic auditory cueing were analyzed on twenty-three studies (Supplementary Figure 22) and they revealed a positive small effect size (g: 0.35, 95% C.I: 0.22 to 0.48, I2: 35.3%, p = 0.04) with moderate heterogeneity. Studies were then separated based on training or direct application of rhythmic auditory cueing. A sub-group analysis for nine studies analyzing direct application of rhythmic auditory cueing among nine studies (Supplementary Figure 23), revealed a positive small effect size (g: 0.12, 95% C.I: −0.11 to 0.35, I2: 0%, p = 0.72) with negligible heterogeneity. Moreover, for the training group thirteen studies (Supplementary Figure 24) were evaluated and the analysis revealed a positive small effect size (g: 0.37, 95% C.I: 0.23 to 0.51, I2: 26.2%, p = 0.16) with moderate heterogeneity. For training group with 30 minutes of training (Supplementary Figure 25), the analysis revealed a positive small effect size (g: 0.36, 95% C.I: 0.21 to 0.51, I2: 42.5%, p = 0.07) with moderate heterogeneity. Three studies with different training regimes i.e. 20 minutes, and 1 hour duration were excluded,. A further analysis determining treatment duration across more than or less than 5 weeks revealed medium positive effect size (g: 0.61, 95% C.I: 0.44 to 0.78, I2: 71.2%, p > 0.1) with substantial heterogeneity. Further sub-group analysis for less than 5 session per week of training revealed small positive effect size (g: 0.39, 95% C.I: 0.08 to 0.7, I2: 0%, p < 0.11) with negligible heterogeneity,. For studies analyzing training for more than 5 sessions per week (Supplementary Figure 26), revealed small positive effect size (g: 0.4, 95% C.I: 0.1 to 0.68, I2: 0%, p > 0.5) with negligible heterogeneity.

Randomized controlled trials

A sub group analysis for 4 randomized controlled trials (Supplementary Figure 27) revealed a positive medium effect size (g: 0.56, 95% C.I: 0.42 to 0.69, I2: 98.04%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. A sub group analysis for two randomized controlled trials analyzing the effects of rhythmic auditory cueing without training revealed no effect (g: 0.0, 95% C.I: −0.28 to 0.3, I2: 0%, p = 0.9) with negligible heterogeneity. Stride length under dual-task condition was analyzed amongst eight studies (Supplementary Figure 28). The analysis revealed a positive small effect size (g: 0.31, 95% C.I: 0.14 to 0.48, I2: 0%, p = 0.8) with negligible heterogeneity.

Cadence

Cadence was analyzed amongst thirty studies (Figure 6). Additional sub-group data was extracted from eleven included studies. The analysis of studies revealed a negative small effect size (g: −0.05, 95% C.I: −0.13 to 0.03, I2: 93.6%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. A positive effect here refers to enhancement in step frequency i.e. number of steps per minute, and a negative effect refers to reduction in step frequency.

Two studies compared the effects of “on” and “off” phase of medications on the patient's affected from parkinsonism,. A sub-group analysis for “off” treatment groups (Supplementary Figure 29) revealed a negative small effect size (g: −0.1, 95% C.I: −0.46 to −0.25, I2: 81.97%, p = 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. Likewise, for “on” treatment group (Supplementary Figure 30), a positive small effect size (g: −0.13, 95% C.I: −0.20 to 0.46, I2: 89.69%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity was observed. The heterogeneity could be attributed to the use of different tempi i.e. at preferred cadence, at tempo faster than preferred cadence, during rhythmic auditory cueing training by McIntosh et al.. Moreover, sub-groups analyses were performed for gait performance with “fast” and “slow” paced tempi with respect to patient’s preferred cadence. Five studies compared effects of fast and slow paced stimuli,,,,, whereas two studies evaluated the effects of only fast paced stimuli on gait performance,. Further, seven studies analyzed only fast-paced stimuli (Supplementary Figure 31), a positive large effect size (g: 1.0, 95% C.I: 0.78 to 1.34, I2: 87.05%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity was observed. A sub-group analysis lead to exclusion of three studies based on the severity of patients included i.e. >9 years of disease duration,,. The analysis of fast-paced stimuli in less severe patients revealed a positive medium effect size (g: 0.61, 95% C.I: 0.25 to 0.94, I2: 0%, p = 0.49) with negligible heterogeneity. In severe patients, we observed a positive large effect size (g: 1.75, 95% C.I: 1.31 to 2.18, I2: 74.6%, p = 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. However, we excluded Willems et al., from further analysis as the authors incorporated a faster tempo i.e. + 20% as compared to + 10% in the other studies,. We observed a positive large effect size (g 1.4, 95% C.I: 0.89 to 1.91, I2: 27.6%, p = 0.24) with marginally moderate heterogeneity. Six studies analyzed the effects of slow-paced stimuli on gait performance in patients (Supplementary Figure 32). We observed a negative large effect (g −1.25, 95% C.I: −1.59 to −0.92, I2: 89.34%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. Further, on dividing the studies into two categories i.e. >9 years of disease duration (severe and less severe). We observed a negative medium effect (g −0.5, 95% C.I: −0.97 to −0.04, I2: 0%, p = 0.93) with negligible heterogeneity, in less severe group. Whereas, a negative large effect (g −2.05, 95% C.I: −2.53 to −1.57, I2: 92.45%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity was observed in the more severe group. Further, we excluded Willems et al. because the patients differed considerably in terms of age, disease duration and treatment. We then observed a negative large effect (g −1.54, 95% C.I: −2.06 to −1.02, I2: 0%, p = 0.37) with negligible heterogeneity. Twenty studies analyzing rhythmic auditory cueing at preferred cadence revealed a positive small effect size (g 0.17, 95% C.I: 0.01 to 0.32, I2: 90.5%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity (Supplementary Figure 33). On further sub-group analysis nine studies analyzing only rhythmic auditory cueing (Supplementary Figure 34), implementation without training revealed a positive small effect size (g 0.30, 95% C.I: 0.07 to 0.53, I2: 0%, p = 0.45) with negligible heterogeneity. Thereafter, studies analyzing only rhythmic auditory cueing implementation with training (Supplementary Figure 35), revealed a small negative effect size (g: 0.04, 95% C.I: −0.1 to 0.2, I2: 93.6%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. Studies analyzing only rhythmic auditory cueing implementation with 30 min (Supplementary Figure 36), of training revealed a small effect size (g: 0.09, 95% C.I: −0.06 to 0.25, I2: 95.5%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. Further, we excluded Song and Ryu, Pau et al., and de Bruin et al. as the authors included the training for 8, 12 and 13 weeks, respectively. Furthermore, two studies differing considerably in training regimes were excluded from further analysis,. Studies analyzing only rhythmic auditory cueing implementation with training for a few sessions in less than 5 weeks (Supplementary Figure 37), revealed a positive medium effect size (g: 0.65, 95% C.I: 0.33 to 0.96, I2: 0%, p = 0.94) with negligible heterogeneity. An analysis of studies evaluating rhythmic auditory cueing with training more than 5 days per week (Supplementary Figure 38) revealed a negative small effect size (g: −0.22, 95% C.I: −1.16 to 0.71, I2: 23.6%, p > 0.05) with negligible heterogeneity.

Randomized controlled trials

We analyzed three randomized controlled trials which evaluated the effects of rhythmic auditory cueing on cadence (Supplementary Figure 39). Upon analysis, we observed a small effect (g 0.07, 95% C.I: −0.08 to 0.22, I2: 44.6%, p = 0.13) with moderate heterogeneity. Cadence under dual-task condition was analyzed amongst nine studies (Supplementary Figure 42). The analysis revealed a positive small effect size (g: 0.11, 95% C.I: −0.06 to 0.8, I2: 0%, p = 0.8) with negligible heterogeneity.

Double limb support phase

Double limb support phase was analyzed amongst eight studies,,,,,,,. Additional sub-group data was extracted from three included studies,,. A positive effect here refers to increase in total duration when both feet are in contact with the ground, and vice versa for the negative effect. The analysis (Supplementary Figure 43) revealed a positive medium effect size (g: 0.5, 95% C.I: 0.34 to 0.67, I2: 93.46%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. With a fast-paced stimulus the rhythmic auditory cueing (Supplementary Figure 44), reveals a small effect size in positive domain (g: 0.46, 95% C.I: 0.05 to 0.87, I2: 92.3%, p < 0.01) with negligible heterogeneity. Two studies with slow-paced stimuli (Supplementary Figure 45) yielded small positive effects (g: 0.33, 95% C.I: −0.18 to 0.85, I2: 92.8%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. This heterogeneity could possibly be attributed to the range of severity i.e. stage II, III and IV of parkinsonism in. Finally, analysis with rhythmic auditory cueing at preferred cadence (Supplementary Figure 46), revealed reduction in double limb support phase with medium effect size in negative domain (g: −0.56, 95% C.I: −0.9 to −0.22, I2: 0%, p = 0.72) with negligible heterogeneity.

Turn time

Three studies analyzed the effects of rhythmic auditory cueing on turn time,,. A positive effect here refers to increase in total duration for performing a turn during gait, and vice versa for the negative effect. The analysis revealed a negative large effect size (g: −2.2, 95% C.I: −2.49 to −1.94, I2: 83.8%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. Arias and Cudeiro were excluded from further analysis as the authors utilized a rhythmic auditory cueing with faster tempo. The studies were then segregated according to their patient’s characteristics as freezers and non-freezers. The meta-analysis for freezers revealed negative large effect size (g: −2.08, 95% C.I: −2.5 to −1.66, I2: 93.7%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. Further, an analysis for non-freezers revealed negative large effect size (g: −2.3, 95% C.I: −2.71 to −1.88, I2: 87.67%, p < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity. The heterogeneity cannot be further explained here.

Discussion

The primary objective of this present systematic review and meta-analysis was to develop a current state of knowledge for the effects of rhythmic auditory cueing on gait stability in parkinsonian patients. Out of fifty-included studies 88% studies reported beneficial effects of rhythmic auditory cueing on gait parameters. Further, the meta-analysis yielded significant small-to-large standardized effects for the benefits of rhythmic auditory cueing on spatiotemporal gait parameters for parkinsonian patients. Previous studies have reported substantial negative effects of parkinsonism on spatial parameters of gait for instance, stride length, and gait velocity. The current analysis revealed that both stride length (g: 0.48) and gait velocity (g: 0.27) can be enhanced by rhythmic auditory cueing. However, a generalized negative effect of rhythmic auditory cueing was observed on cadence (g: −0.13). Generally, patients with parkinsonism are characterized with reduced gait velocity, stride length, foot clearance, increased cadence, narrowed base of support, festination and in advanced cases freezing of gait,. The primary underlying physiological reason being inability to generate a substantial amplitude of motor movements, possibly due to deficits in internal timing of movements,–.

From a neurophysiological aspect, Spaulding et al. suggested discrepancies in sensory-motor interactions which might lead to such autonomic disruptions. Nombela et al. reattributed and mentioned the dysfunction of an internal cueing system which is associated with coordinating a information exchange between basal ganglia and supplementary motor area. Moreover, studies have also suggested degeneration of a widespread neural network in Parkinson’s disease including cerebellum, basal ganglia, somatosensory area and pre-somatosensory area during the degenerative process,. Kotz and Schwartze reported that during the preclinical stage, hyperactivity in pre-somatosensory area might be a compensatory mechanism for cerebellar dysfunctions. Likewise, in advanced stages selective loss of pyramidal neurons in pre-somatosensory area might result in its underactivity, followed by deficits in temporal processing,, possibly leading to motor block or freezing instances during gait.

The use of rhythmic auditory cueing has been discussed widely in published literature,,,,,. This medium of entrainment transfer has been speculated to bypass the affected basal ganglia network (pallidal-supplementary motor area) via another alternative pathway,,. Moreover, Fujioka et al. reported modulation of neuromagnetic β oscillations with rhythmic auditory stimuli in auditory cortex, cerebellum, inferior frontal gyrus, somatosensory area and sensorimotor cortex. The stimuli has been suggested to activate inferior colliculi, cerebellum, brainstem,, sensorimotor cortex,, further instigating reorganization in cortico-cerebellar circuits. Rhythmic auditory cueing has also been suggested to reap the benefits of the preserved neural centres, involved in perceiving externally cued and goal directed movements amongst parkinsonian patients (see also “kinesia paradoxica”). The authors proposed that motor activities directed by external sensory cueing evoke pathways via cortical, premotor areas, effectively bypassing the affected basal ganglia region. Studies have suggested that rhythmic sensory cues can also replace deficient pallidal-cortical projections, activate the supplementary motor area and aid in motor tasks by mimicking feedforward input, thereby reducing bradykinesia, and associated motor deficits. Similarly, the external cueing can supplement critical spatio-temporal information which is necessary for initiation or facilitating motor activities,, such as during gait or arm movements,. In context of gait execution the external rhythm can guide the patients to synchronize their ground contact and lift-off times. The auditory patterns might also assist the planning of a motor command before executing a movement. Moreover, the periodicity in rhythmic auditory cueing has also demonstrated to effectively reduce variability in musculoskeletal activation patterns, thereby allowing more economical and consistent motor unit recruitment, further smoothing the velocity and acceleration profiles of joint motions by scaling movement time.

Typical pharmacological interventions for controlling motor symptoms in parkinsonism include levodopa, dopamine agonists and monoamine oxidase type B inhibitors. Rochester et al. interestingly mentioned the limitations of dopaminergic medications on gait dysfunctions associated with degeneration of non-dopaminergic pathways. The medications allow only symptomatic relief and offer no relief from the underlying pathology. Moreover, their benefits in terms of enhancement of gait performance is still debatable. Benefits in turn time, stride length, gait speed, have been reported in some studies. While some studies report no effects on gait speed, cadence, stride time variability, double limb support duration, and reduction in postural stability. The current meta-analysis observed beneficial effects of concurrent application of medications and rhythmic auditory cueing. The analyses reported marginally larger effect sizes for stride length (g: 0.96) and gait velocity (g: 0.55) during the “on” phase of medications, in comparison to the “off” medication group for stride length (g: 0.86) and gait velocity (0.43). However, such differences were not found for cadence, where small negative effect sizes were observed in both “on” (−0.13) and “off” (−0.10) conditions. It is important to note that this analysis shows the compensatory role of rhythmic auditory cueing for counteracting motor deficits in the absence of medications. Although, studies have reported the benefits of the medications in short-term, a long term cost concerning motor dysfunction has also been reported. Long-term consumption of medications i.e. both levodopa and levodopa sparring therapy has been associated with severe consequences on health and quality of life such as dyskinesis, loss of drug efficacy and toxicity,. This is possibly due to levodopa associated decline in dopamine transported integrity located in nigrostriatal nerve terminals. Likewise, the progression of disease has shown to reduce the effectiveness of medications, especially on gait characteristics. Therefore, the findings in the present review strongly suggest the use of rhythmic auditory cueing as an adjunct therapy with medications to curb the motor deficits in Parkinson’s disease. Moreover, we suggest future studies to analyse the long-term effects of rhythmic auditory cueing with withdrawal of parkinsonian medications, to observe whether the enhancements obtained are resilient and are retained, or not.

Another crucial factor in rhythmic auditory cueing that might significantly influence the rehabilitation progress of a parkinsonian patient is “change in tempo”. For instance, change in tempo has been associated with various neurophysiological changes such as, increased neuronal activation in fronto-occipital networks, excitability of the spinal motor neurons by reticulospinal pathways, which might possibly reduce the response time for a motor task. Likewise, variation in tempo during training is suggested to be beneficial for maintaining a healthy gait pattern, as constant rhythmic pattern for longer durations have shown to decrease fractal scaling of stride times from healthy 1/f structure, possibly because of organization of stride time variability around a single frequency–. Additionally, Buchecker et al. demonstrated beneficial effects of enhanced variability within training on posture and electromyographic activity (see more from “dynamic system theory”). This might serve to be beneficial for parkinsonian patients to learn how to regulate gait, when passing through fall-prone environments. Moreover, the induction of variability can also be subjected subliminally (for instance changes in tempo, frequency, timbre, interstimulus interval, see also). This might maintain variability in the rehabilitation protocol and simultaneously prevent any conscious stress to excessively speed up, or slow down the gait. Future studies can elucidate these effects by evaluating variability in both the auditory and environmental components within training paradigms. In the current analyses, our aim was to determine the extent of tempo shift which might be beneficial in a rehabilitation protocol. Previous studies have shown that healthy participants can easily modulate gait parameters to changes such as ±20%,, however parkinsonian patients have failed to demonstrate such effects. Supposedly, an exceedingly fast tempo might surpass patient’s physiological capabilities and could possibly promote the patient in a high-stress situation. Further this increased tempo associated enhancement in gait velocity, cadence, and double limbs support parameters can lead to a speed-accuracy trade off,. On the contrary, too slow tempo, for instance might allow the participant more time than required to execute a movement, possibly promoting movement specific re-investment,. Therefore, the extent of tempo shift should be tailor made according to the patients’ capabilities.

Fast pace stimuli i.e. ≤ +10% has been suggested to effectively counteract reduction in gait velocity, cadence, stride length. We observed enhancement in gait velocity (g: 0.7), cadence (1.0), and stride length (0.30). Likewise, use of fast paced tempo is to be encouraged during the early phase of disease. Willems et al. suggested an association between tempo reduction and enhanced stride length, but also with reduced cadence and gait velocity. This could possibly be attributed to a speed-accuracy trade-off mechanism, where reduction in gait velocity but enhancement in stride length offers slow, but stable gait performance. The present meta-analysis with the application of slow-paced tempo i.e. ≥+ 10% reported benefits in stride length (g: 0.69), reduction in cadence (−1.25), and gait velocity (−0.24). Thereby, suggesting an efficient manoeuvre to counteract the shuffling gait characteristic in parkinsonian patient i.e. short stride length with faster cadence,, especially during the advanced stages of disease where rehabilitation aims should focus more on mobility with stability. Gait training with rhythmic auditory cueing at preferred cadence also has shown to allow benefits in gait velocity (g: 0.43), stride length (0.6), cadence (0.46), reduction in turn time (−2.2), and double limb support phase (−0.56). However, a regular use of the same tempo at preferred cadence might impact recovery in terms of fractal scaling. Therefore, in terms of practical application of different tempo in rehabilitation protocols we suggest utilization of preferred, slow and fast tempi (±10% of preferred cadence), to maintain variability in gait during training.

As per the training dosage that should possess most beneficial effects, we observed fourteen studies analysing the effects of rhythmic auditory training with 30 minutes duration, two studies each analysed the training for 20, 45 minutes and 1 hour. Beneficial enhancements in gait parameters were observed in all the studies analysing the effects during a 30 minutes gait training session. These effects were also evident during a 45 minutes session, and for 20 minutes sessions. However, one study analysing the effects of training for long sessions (1- hour) revealed beneficial effects with a fast paced stimuli, while the other revealed no effects. We believe, both mental and physical fatigue could have played a crucial aspect for affecting the gait parameters during the long sessions. Nevertheless, more evidence from training studies is required to ascertain the negative effects of long training sessions. Based on the current evidence we strongly suggest limiting the treatment duration between 25–40 minutes/ session. Likewise, a minimum of at least 3–5 sessions of rehabilitation are suggested per week, because highest enhancement in stride length (g: 0.39), cadence (0.65) and gait velocity (0.73) were observed during this period. However, this analysis of training dosage must be carefully interpreted as substantial heterogeneity was observed within studies, due to difference in severity and training regimes. These suggestions are in line with the findings of Nascimento et al. where the authors reported application of rhythmic auditory cueing for 30 minutes and for 4 times a week for stroke patients.

It is important to note that the retention of enhancements in gait parameters relies not only on the training received in the clinic but also depends largely on how much the patient follows the treatment protocol at home. The patient usually spends limited amount of time in a rehabilitation setting. Therefore, performing and re-executing the tasks effectively and regularly at home is vital for enhancements in motor performance and quality of life. Lim et al. for instance, reported enhancement in walking activity to 35 minutes per day (qualifying the 30 minutes criteria by centres for disease control and prevention) post home-based gait training with rhythmic auditory cueing. In addition, a home-based training device allowed a 4.2% increase in posture and gait score, 5.5% reduction in freezing instances, 4 cm increase in step length and a 5 cm increase in walking speed. This type of home-based intervention could possibly be beneficial for people lacking proper exposure to medical interventions in developing countries. For instance, parkinsonian patients lacking effective treatment can utilize smartphone devices with dynamic metronome apps such as Walkmate, Listenmee, which with proper medical guidance might allow curbing the motor deficits associated with Parkinson’s disease. In addition, combining the use of external rhythmic entrainment process with different treatment strategies might be a useful tool in rehabilitation as Post et al. suggested the most effective rehabilitation protocol for parkinsonian patients to be multidisciplinary. We included studies analysing the beneficial effects of co-joint application of treadmill and rhythmic auditory cueing. Combining treadmill in gait training sessions offered additional benefits as compared to conventional over ground sessions. For instance, Bello et al., reported improvements in stride length, gait speed, time up and go performance and static postural stability, with retention evitable one-month post training. The current meta-analysis revealed beneficial effects of treadmill training in gait velocity (g: 1.0).

Additionally, using the rhythmic entrainment factor with music, could possibly provoke benefits in both psycho-physiological domains–. For instance, regulating stress levels, mediating arousal, emotions, internal motivation, memory, attention, executive functions,, muscle power, and endurance. Modifications in the types of auditory cueing can also impart differential effects on psycho-physiological aspects of performance. For instance, timbre of an auditory input at a higher intensity merged in a broad ascending melody and a rich harmony can possibly motivate a patient to exert more power,. Also, parkinsonian and associated ageing changes in patients often characterize a higher threshold for action relevant acoustic input, therefore using ecologically valid action related sounds convening spatio-temporal information can possibly enhance saliency of sensory information, transferring spatio-temporal information effectively and therefore providing more benefits,,,. This was also demonstrated by Dotov et al., and,. These authors demonstrated beneficial effects on spatio-temporal gait parameters with biologically variable rhythmic auditory cueing as compared to isosynchronous cueing. Thereby, suggesting potential for modification of auditory signal characteristics for enhancing motor performance in parkinsonian patients. Further methods providing real-time auditory information could possess considerable benefits for enhancing gait performance. One of these methods is movement sonification: here movement parameters are transformed in real-time to sound with an aim to enhance motor perception and performance by targeting areas associated with biological motion perception,,. Although few research has been carried out to analyse its effects on parkinsonian gait performance,, yet, several studies highlight its impact on motor performance and its potential for motor rehabilitation,. Schmitz and Effenberg have shown that the synchronization of cyclic movement patterns with movement sonification reduces variability and increases constancy of movements as compared to discrete auditory stimuli. Furthermore, listening to sonified human movements in contrast to or in addition to non-human auditory stimuli seems to influence movement timing and strengthen entrainment effects, possibly by activating mechanisms of biological motion processing in the human brain,. Moreover, listening to sonification might allow parkinsonian patients to identify their own movement amplitudes and compare their sound with the sound of an auditory movement model, thereby creating a new auditory reference frame. This reference framework might allow a comparison between instructed and intended movement, possibly amplifying the internal representation of movements. This might then induce effects on motor behaviour beyond rhythmic adjustments.

Moreover, counteracting alleviation in conscious attention towards autonomic control, in parkinsonian patients is very critical. Several studies have tried to co-jointly analyze the effects of dual-tasks and rhythmic auditory cueing i.e. to analyze the robustness of auditory-motor coupling with higher information processing constraints,. Dual-tasks are expected to protect the automaticity of the motor tasks, by possibly engaging information processing resources necessary for conscious control (see also constrained action hypothesis, [27]). This present analysis observed small effects on gait parameters with dual task application i.e. gait velocity (g: 0.38), stride length (0.31), and cadence (0.11). Beneficial effects on age related controls have been reported during similar interventions. Nevertheless, rhythmic auditory cueing both with and without training reduced the constraining effects of a manual dual task over gait,. Interpretations from our results however suggest that rhythmic auditory cueing counteracts cognitive constraints imposed by cognitively demanding dual-tasks such as carrying a tray, and that this external cueing might be useful in counteracting fall prone situations such as escalators, traffic signals (see more cross-modal overload substitution). Moreover, dual-task training has been suggested to impart beneficial impacts on stability, as the training phase might allow smoothing of cognitive abilities. Possibly, including dual-task training regimes with different complexities with rhythmic auditory cueing might enhance functional rehabilitation progress, self-dependence for instance while carrying out activities of daily living. Lastly, patients with Parkinson’s have been shown to demonstrate considerable rigidity in trunk motions, possibly leading to asymmetry, reduction in arm swing amplitude, and trunk rotation during gait. Son and Kim reported beneficial effects of rhythmic auditory cueing for increasing arm swing amplitude (36.4° ± 3° vs 25.2° ± 2.8°) and trunk rotation (7° ± 1.3° vs 6.6° ± 0.9°). Thereby, suggesting the beneficial effects of rhythmic auditory cueing beyond the spatiotemporal parameters of gait for enhancing stability.

Our results are consistent with the findings of previous meta-analysis by Spaulding et al., stride length (g: 0.49) and gait velocity (0.54), and cadence (g: 0.55). However, the review did not analyse the quality of included studies, and abstained from performing a heterogeneity analysis. Moreover, Rocha et al. included only seven studies and reported moderate-to-substantial heterogeneity in between studies and abstained from performing sub-group analysis to evaluate the reason for heterogeneity. Therefore, this present literature review for the first time bridges the gap in parkinsonian literature concerning the effects of presence/absence of medications, tempo variations, dual-task settings, and training dosage for improving gait performance with rhythmic auditory cueing.

In conclusion, this review strongly suggests the early incorporation of rhythmic auditory cueing for enhancing gait performance in patients affected from parkinsonism. The results based on meta-analysis suggests training with rhythmic auditory cueing should include tempo variations of ±10% with respect to the preferred cadence, for a minimal period of 20–45 minutes per day, for at least 3–5 days per week. However, in the absence of such facilities as in developing countries, smartphone based apps should be promoted by medical practitioners for home based therapy.

References 199

  1. 1.

    Masters RSW, Maxwell J. The theory of reinvestment. Int. Rev. Sport. Exer. Psychol. 2008;1:160-183.

    Not in our library10.1080/17509840802287218

  2. 2.

    Tinetti ME, Speechley M, Ginter SF. Risk factors for falls among elderly persons living in the community. N. Engl. J. Med. 1988;319:1701-1707.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejm198812293192604

  3. 3.

    Boudarham J, et al. Variations in Kinematics during Clinical Gait Analysis in Stroke Patients. PLoS. ONE. 2013;8:e66421.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0066421

  4. 4.

    Ghai S, Ghai I, Effenberg AO. Effects of dual tasks and dual-task training on postural stability: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Clin. Interv. Aging. 2017;12:557-577.

    Not in our library10.2147/cia.s125201

  5. 5.

    Ghai S, Driller M, Ghai I. Effects of joint stabilizers on proprioception and stability: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Phys. Ther. Sport. 2017;25:65-75.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ptsp.2016.05.006

  6. 6.

    Schlicht J, Camaione DN, Owen SV. Effect of intense strength training on standing balance, walking speed, and sit-to-stand performance in older adults. J. Gerontol. Ser. A: Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2001;56:M281-M286.

    Not in our library10.1093/gerona/56.5.m281

  7. 7.

    Onder G, et al. Change in physical performance over time in older women The Women’s Health and Aging Study. J. Gerontol. Ser. A: Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2002;57:M289-M293.

    Not in our library10.1093/gerona/57.5.m289

  8. 8.

    Cromwell RL, Newton RA. Relationship between balance and gait stability in healthy older adults. J. Aging. Phys. Act. 2004;12:90-100.

    Not in our library10.1123/japa.12.1.90

  9. 9.

    Bhatt T, Espy D, Yang F, Pai Y-C. Dynamic gait stability, clinical correlates, and prognosis of falls among community-dwelling older adults. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2011;92:799-805.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.apmr.2010.12.032

  10. 10.

    Herman T, Giladi N, Gruendlinger L, Hausdorff JM. Six weeks of intensive treadmill training improves gait and quality of life in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a pilot study. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2007;88:1154-1158.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.apmr.2007.05.015

  11. 11.

    Lim I, et al. Does cueing training improve physical activity in patients with Parkinson’s disease? Neurorehabil. Neural. Repair. 2010;24:469-477.

    Not in our library10.1177/1545968309356294

  12. 12.

    Gelb DJ, Oliver E, Gilman S. Diagnostic criteria for Parkinson disease. Arch. Neurol. 1999;56:33-39.

    Not in our library10.1001/archneur.56.1.33

  13. 13.

    Morris ME. Gait Disorders in Parkinson’s Disease: A Framework for Physical Therapy Practice. J. Neurol. Phys. Ther. 1997;21:125-131.

    Not in our library

  14. 14.

    Jankovic, J. & Tolosa, E. Parkinson’s disease and movement disorders. (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2007).

    Not in our library

  15. 15.

    Asmus F, Huber H, Gasser T, Schöls L. Kick and rush: paradoxical kinesia in Parkinson disease. Neurology. 2008;71:695.

    Not in our library10.1212/01.wnl.0000324618.88710.30

  16. 16.

    Lexell J. Evidence for nervous system degeneration with advancing age. J. Nutr. 1997;127:1011S-1013S.

    Not in our library10.1093/jn/127.5.1011s

  17. 17.

    Cameron MH, Wagner JM. Gait abnormalities in multiple sclerosis: pathogenesis, evaluation, and advances in treatment. Curr. Neurol. Neurosci. Rep. 2011;11:507-515.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11910-011-0214-y

  18. 18.

    Cromwell RL, Newton RA, Forrest G. Influence of vision on head stabilization strategies in older adults during walking. J. Gerontol. Ser. A: Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2002;57:M442-M448.

    Not in our library10.1093/gerona/57.7.m442

  19. 19.

    Medeiros H, Bd. O, Araújo DSMSd, Araújo CGSd. Age-related mobility loss is joint-specific: an analysis from 6,000 Flexitest results. Age. 2013;35:2399-2407.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11357-013-9525-z

  20. 20.

    Ghai, S., Ghai, I., & Effenberg, A. O. Effect of Rhythmic Auditory Cueing on Aging Gait: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Aging. Dis. 131–200, 10.14336/ad.2017.1031 (2017).

    Not in our library10.14336/ad.2017.1031

  21. 21.

    Hausdorff JM. Gait Dynamics, Fractals and Falls: Finding Meaning in the Stride-to-Stride Fluctuations of Human Walking. Hum. Mov. Sci. 2007;26:555-589.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.humov.2007.05.003

  22. 22.

    Callisaya ML, et al. Gait, gait variability and the risk of multiple incident falls in older people: a population-based study. Age. Ageing. 2011;40:481-487.

    Not in our library10.1093/ageing/afr055

  23. 23.

    Schaefer S, Schellenbach M, Lindenberger U, Woollacott M. Walking in high-risk settings: Do older adults still prioritize gait when distracted by a cognitive task? Exp. Brain. Res. 2015;233:79-88.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00221-014-4093-8

  24. 24.

    Ghai, S., Driller, M. & Masters, R. The influence of below-knee compression garments on knee-joint proprioception. Gait. Posture. in press, 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.08.008 (2016).

    Not in our library10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.08.008

  25. 25.

    Masters RSW. Knowledge, knerves and know‐how: The role of explicit versus implicit knowledge in the breakdown of a complex motor skill under pressure. Brit J Psychol. 1992;83:343-358.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.2044-8295.1992.tb02446.x

  26. 26.

    Ghai, S. Proprioception and Performance: The role of below-knee compression garments and secondary tasks (Master’s dissertation, University of Waikato) (2016).

    Not in our library

  27. 27.

    Talelli P, Ewas A, Waddingham W, Rothwell J, Ward N. Neural correlates of age-related changes in cortical neurophysiology. Neuroimage. 2008;40:1772-1781.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.01.039

  28. 28.

    Miller RA, Thaut MH, McIntosh GC, Rice RR. Components of EMG symmetry and variability in parkinsonian and healthy elderly gait. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 1996;101:1-7.

    Not in our library10.1016/0013-4694(95)00209-x

  29. 29.

    Hong M, Perlmutter JS, Earhart GM. A kinematic and electromyographic analysis of turning in people with Parkinson disease. Neurorehabil. Neural. Repair. 2009;23:166-176.

    Not in our library10.1177/1545968308320639

  30. 30.

    Nieuwboer, A. et al. The short-term effects of different cueing modalities on turn speed in people with Parkinson’s disease. Neurorehabil. Neural. Repair. 23, 831–836, doi:10.1177/1545968309337136 (2009).

    Not in our library10.1177/1545968309337136

  31. 31.

    Arias P, Cudeiro J. Effect of rhythmic auditory stimulation on gait in Parkinsonian patients with and without freezing of gait. PLoS. ONE. 2010;5:e9675.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0009675

  32. 32.
  33. 33.

    de Rooij IJ, van de Port IG, Meijer JG. Effect of Virtual Reality Training on Balance and Gait Ability in Patients With Stroke: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Phys. Ther. 2016;96:1905-1918.

    Not in our library10.2522/ptj.20160054

  34. 34.

    Pizzolato, C. et al. Biofeedback for gait retraining based on real-time estimation of tibiofemoral joint contact forces. IEEE. Trans. Neural. Syst. Rehabil. Eng., 10.1109/tnsre.2017.2683488 (2017).

    Not in our library10.1109/tnsre.2017.2683488

  35. 35.

    Eng JJ, Tang PF. Gait training strategies to optimize walking ability in people with stroke: A synthesis of the evidence. Expert. Rev. Neurother. 2007;7:1417-1436.

    Not in our library10.1586/14737175.7.10.1417

  36. 36.

    Bastian A, Keller JL. A Home Balance Exercise Program Improves Walking in People with Cerebellar Ataxia. Neurorehabil. Neural. Repair. 2014;28:770-778.

    Not in our library10.1177/1545968314522350

  37. 37.

    Hackney ME, Earhart GM. Effects of Dance on Movement Control in Parkinson’s Disease: A Comparison of Argentine Tango and American Ballroom. J. Rehabil. Med.: Off. J. UEMS Euro. Board Phys. Rehabil. Med. 2009;41:475-481.

    Not in our library10.2340/16501977-0362

  38. 38.

    Mehrholz, J. et al. Treadmill training for patients with Parkinson’s disease. Cochrane. Database. Syst. Rev., Cd007830, 10.1002/14651858.CD007830.pub3 (2015).

    Not in our library10.1002/14651858.cd007830.pub3

  39. 39.

    Thaut MH, Abiru M. Rhythmic auditory stimulation in rehabilitation of movement disorders: a review of current research. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 2010;27:263-269.

    Not in our library10.1525/mp.2010.27.4.263

  40. 40.

    Group PMC. Long-term effectiveness of dopamine agonists and monoamine oxidase B inhibitors compared with levodopa as initial treatment for Parkinson’s disease (PD MED): a large, open-label, pragmatic randomised trial. The Lancet. 2014;384:1196-1205.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60683-8

  41. 41.

    Tedeschi G, Sasso E, Marshall RW, Bonavita V. Tremor in Parkinson disease: acute response to oral levodopa. Ital. J. Neurol. Sci. 1990;11:259-263.

    Not in our library10.1007/bf02333855

  42. 42.

    Rocha PA, Porfírio GM, Ferraz HB, Trevisani VF. Effects of external cues on gait parameters of Parkinson’s disease patients: a systematic review. Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 2014;124:127-134.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.clineuro.2014.06.026

  43. 43.

    Spaulding SJ, et al. Cueing and gait improvement among people with Parkinson’s disease: a meta-analysis. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2013;94:562-570.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.apmr.2012.10.026

  44. 44.

    Maculewicz J, Erkut C, Serafin S. An investigation on the impact of auditory and haptic feedback on rhythmic walking interactions. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2016;85:40-46.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijhcs.2015.07.003

  45. 45.

    Nombela C, Hughes LE, Owen AM, Grahn JA. Into the groove: can rhythm influence Parkinson’s disease? Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2013;37:2564-2570.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.08.003

  46. 46.

    Thaut, M. H. Rhythm, music, and the brain: Scientific foundations and clinical applications. Vol. 7 (Routledge, 2005).

    Not in our library

  47. 47.

    van den Heuvel MR, Daffertshofer A, Beek PJ, Kwakkel G, van Wegen EE. The effects of visual feedback during a rhythmic weight-shifting task in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Gait. Posture. 2016;48:140-145.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.03.020

  48. 48.

    Raglio, A. Music therapy interventions in Parkinson’s disease: the state-of-the-art. Front. Neurol. 6 (2015).

    Not in our library10.3389/fneur.2015.00185

  49. 49.

    Shelton J, Kumar GP. Comparison between auditory and visual simple reaction times. Neurosci. Med. 2010;1:30.

    Not in our library10.4236/nm.2010.11004

  50. 50.

    Thaut M, Kenyon G, Schauer M, McIntosh G. The connection between rhythmicity and brain function. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Magazine. 1999;18:101-108.

    Not in our library10.1109/51.752991

  51. 51.

    Ermolaeva VY, Borgest A. Intercortical connections of the auditory areas with the motor area. Neurosci. Behav. Physiol. 1980;10:210-215.

    Not in our library10.1007/bf01182212

  52. 52.

    Felix RA, Fridberger A, Leijon S, Berrebi AS, Magnusson AK. Sound rhythms are encoded by postinhibitory rebound spiking in the superior paraolivary nucleus. J. Neurosci. 2011;31:12566-12578.

    Not in our library10.1523/jneurosci.2450-11.2011

  53. 53.
  54. 54.

    Butler JS, Foxe JJ, Fiebelkorn IC, Mercier MR, Molholm S. Multisensory representation of frequency across audition and touch: high density electrical mapping reveals early sensory-perceptual coupling. J. Neurosci. 2012;32:15338-15344.

    Not in our library10.1523/jneurosci.1796-12.2012

  55. 55.

    Lega C, Vecchi T, D’Angelo E, Cattaneo ZA. TMS investigation on the role of the cerebellum in pitch and timbre discrimination. Cerebellum & Ataxias. 2016;3:6.

    Not in our library10.1186/s40673-016-0044-4

  56. 56.

    Bukowska, A. A., Krężałek, P., Mirek, E., Bujas, P. & Marchewka, A. Neurologic music therapy training for mobility and stability rehabilitation with Parkinson’s disease–A pilot study. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 9 (2015).

    Not in our library10.3389/fnhum.2015.00710

  57. 57.

    Effenberg AO, Fehse U, Schmitz G, Krueger B, Mechling H. Movement sonification: Effects on motor learning beyond rhythmic adjustments. Front. Neurosci. 2016;10:219.

    Not in our library10.3389/fnins.2016.00219

  58. 58.

    Yoo GE, Kim SJ. Rhythmic auditory cueing in motor rehabilitation for stroke patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Music. Ther. 2016;53:149-177.

    Not in our library10.1093/jmt/thw003

  59. 59.

    Kim SJ, et al. Changes in gait patterns with rhythmic auditory stimulation in adults with cerebral palsy. Neuro. Rehabil. 2011;29:233-241.

    Not in our library10.3233/nre-2011-0698

  60. 60.

    Ghai, S., Ghai, I. & Effenberg, A. O. Effect of rhythmic auditory cueing on gait in Cerebral palsy: A systematic review and metaanalysis. Neuropsychiatr. Dis. Treat., 1–17 (2017) Accepted, In press.

    Not in our library10.2147/ndt.s148053

  61. 61.

    Thaut MH, Miltner R, Lange HW, Hurt CP, Hoemberg V. Velocity modulation and rhythmic synchronization of gait in Huntington’s disease. Movement Disorders. 1999;14:808-819.

    Not in our library10.1002/1531-8257(199909)14:5<808::aid-mds1014>3.0.co;2-j

  62. 62.

    Baram Y, Miller A. Auditory feedback control for improvement of gait in patients with Multiple Sclerosis. J. Neurol. Sci. 2007;254:90-94.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jns.2007.01.003

  63. 63.

    Shannon K. The effect of rhythmic auditory stimulation on the gait parameters of patients with incomplete spinal cord injury: an exploratory pilot study. Int. J. Rehabil. Res. 2008;31:155-157.

    Not in our library10.1097/mrr.0b013e3282fc0f44

  64. 64.

    Thaut MH. Neural basis of rhythmic timing networks in the human brain. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2003;999:364-373.

    Not in our library10.1196/annals.1284.044

  65. 65.

    Fujioka T, Trainor LJ, Large EW, Ross B. Internalized timing of isochronous sounds is represented in neuromagnetic beta oscillations. J. Neurosci. 2012;32:1791-1802.

    Not in our library10.1523/jneurosci.4107-11.2012

  66. 66.

    Schmitz G, et al. Observation of sonified movements engages a basal ganglia frontocortical network. BMC. Neurosci. 2013;14:1.

    Not in our library10.1186/1471-2202-14-32

  67. 67.

    Heremans E, et al. Cued motor imagery in patients with multiple sclerosis. Neuroscience. 2012;206:115-121.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neuroscience.2011.12.060

  68. 68.

    Heremans E, et al. External cueing improves motor imagery quality in patients with Parkinson disease. Neurorehabil. Neural. Repair. 2012;26:27-35.

    Not in our library10.1177/1545968311411055

  69. 69.

    Miller RA, Thaut MH, McIntosh GC, Rice RR. Components of EMG symmetry and variability in parkinsonian and healthy elderly gait. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Electromyography and Motor Control. 1996;101:1-7.

    Not in our library10.1016/0013-4694(95)00209-x

  70. 70.

    Luft AR, et al. Repetitive bilateral arm training and motor cortex activation in chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;292:1853-1861.

    Not in our library10.1001/jama.292.15.1853

  71. 71.

    Rochester L, Baker K, Nieuwboer A, Burn D. Targeting dopa‐sensitive and dopa‐resistant gait dysfunction in Parkinson’s disease: Selective responses to internal and external cues. Movement Disorders. 2011;26:430-435.

    Not in our library10.1002/mds.23450

  72. 72.

    Raglio A. Music Therapy Interventions in Parkinson’s Disease: The State-of-the-Art. Front. Neurol. 2015;6:185.

    Not in our library10.3389/fneur.2015.00185

  73. 73.

    Ghai, S., Schmitz, G., Hwang, T.-H. & Effenberg, A. O. In 22nd Annunal Congress of European College of SportsScience. (edsFerrauti, A. et al.) 36.

    Not in our library

  74. 74.

    Lim I, et al. Effects of external rhythmical cueing on gait in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review. Clin. Rehabil. 2005;19:695-713.

    Not in our library10.1191/0269215505cr906oa

  75. 75.

    Liberati A, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann. Intern. Med. 2009;151:W-65-W-94.

    Not in our library10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136

  76. 76.

    de Morton NA. The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials: a demographic study. Australian Journal of Physiotherapy. 2009;55:129-133.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0004-9514(09)70043-1

  77. 77.

    Maher CG, Sherrington C, Herbert RD, Moseley AM, Elkins M. Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys. Ther. 2003;83:713-721.

    Not in our library

  78. 78.

    Teasell, Robert, N. Bayona, & J. Bitensky. Background concepts in stroke rehabilitation. EBRSR: Evidence-Based Review of Stroke Rehabilitation (2008).

    Not in our library

  79. 79.

    Ramsey L, Winder RJ, McVeigh JG. The effectiveness of working wrist splints in adults with rheumatoid arthritis: A mixed methods systematic review. J. Rehabil. Med. 2014;46:481-492.

    Not in our library10.2340/16501977-1804

  80. 80.

    Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins J, Rothstein HR. A basic introduction to fixed‐effect and random‐effects models for meta‐analysis. Res. Synthesis Met. 2010;1:97-111.

    Not in our library10.1002/jrsm.12

  81. 81.

    Higgins, J. P. & Green, S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Vol. 4 (John Wiley & Sons, 2011).

    Not in our library

  82. 82.

    Cumming, G. Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. (Routledge, 2013).

    Not in our library

  83. 83.

    Cohen, J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd edn, (L, Erlbaum Associates, 1988).

    Not in our library

  84. 84.

    Rochester L, Burn DJ, Woods G, Godwin J, Nieuwboer A. Does auditory rhythmical cueing improve gait in people with Parkinson’s disease and cognitive impairment? A feasibility study. Movement Disorders. 2009;24:839-845.

    Not in our library10.1002/mds.22400

  85. 85.

    Chaiwanichsiri, D., Wangno, W., Kitisomprayoonkul, W. & Bhiyadayasiri, R. Treadmill training with music cueing: a new approach for Parkinson’s gait facilitation. Asian. Biomed.5(5), 649–654, 10.5372/1905-7415.0505.086 (2011).

    Not in our library

  86. 86.

    Willems A-M, et al. The use of rhythmic auditory cues to influence gait in patients with Parkinson’s disease, the differential effect for freezers and non-freezers, an explorative study. Disabil. Rehabil. 2006;28:721-728.

    Not in our library10.1080/09638280500386569

  87. 87.

    Willems AM, et al. Turning in Parkinson’s disease patients and controls: the effect of auditory cues. Movement disorders. 2007;22:1871-1878.

    Not in our library10.1002/mds.21445

  88. 88.

    Rochester L, et al. Evidence for motor learning in Parkinson’s disease: acquisition, automaticity and retention of cued gait performance after training with external rhythmical cues. Brain. Res. 2010;1319:103-111.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.brainres.2010.01.001

  89. 89.

    Nieuwboer A, et al. Cueing training in the home improves gait-related mobility in Parkinson’s disease: the RESCUE trial. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psych. 2007;78:134-140.

    Not in our library10.1136/jnnp.200x.097923

  90. 90.

    Chen P-H, et al. Walking Turns in Parkinson’s Disease Patients with Freezing of Gait: The Short-term Effects of Different Cueing Strategies. Int. J. Gerontol. 2016;10:71-75.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijge.2014.09.004

  91. 91.

    Lopez WO, et al. Listenmee and Listenmee smartphone application: synchronizing walking to rhythmic auditory cues to improve gait in Parkinson’s disease. Hum. Mov. Sci. 2014;37:147-156.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.humov.2014.08.001

  92. 92.

    Espay AJ, et al. At-home training with closed-loop augmented-reality cueing device for improving gait in patients with Parkinson disease. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev. 2010;47:573.

    Not in our library10.1682/jrrd.2009.10.0165

  93. 93.

    Howe TE, Lövgreen B, Cody FW, Ashton V, Oldham J. Auditory cues can modify the gait of persons with early-stage Parkinson’s disease: a method for enhancing parkinsonian walking performance? Clin. Rehabil. 2003;17:363-367.

    Not in our library10.1191/0269215503cr621oa

  94. 94.

    Dotov D, et al. Biologically-variable rhythmic auditory cues are superior to isochronous cues in fostering natural gait variability in Parkinson’s disease. Gait. Posture. 2017;51:64-69.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.09.020

  95. 95.

    Young WR, Rodger MW, Craig CM. Auditory observation of stepping actions can cue both spatial and temporal components of gait in Parkinson’s disease patients. Neuropsychologia. 2014;57:140-153.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.03.009

  96. 96.
  97. 97.
  98. 98.

    de Bruin, N. et al. Walking with music is a safe and viable tool for gait training in Parkinson’s disease: the effect of a 13-week feasibility study on single and dual task walking. Parkinsons. Dis.2010 (2010).

    Not in our library10.4061/2010/483530

  99. 99.

    Elston J, Honan W, Powell R, Gormley J, Stein K. Do metronomes improve the quality of life in people with Parkinson’s disease? A pragmatic, single-blind, randomized cross-over trial. Clin. Rehabil. 2010;24:523-532.

    Not in our library10.1177/0269215509360646

  100. 100.

    Ma H-I, Hwang W-J, Lin K-C. The effects of two different auditory stimuli on functional arm movement in persons with Parkinson’s disease: a dual-task paradigm. Clin. Rehabil. 2009;23:229-237.

    Not in our library10.1177/0269215508098896

  101. 101.

    Jiang Y, Norman KE. Effects of visual and auditory cues on gait initiation in people with Parkinson’s disease. Clin. Rehabil. 2006;20:36-45.

    Not in our library10.1191/0269215506cr925oa

  102. 102.

    del Olmo MF, Arias P, Furio M, Pozo M, Cudeiro J. Evaluation of the effect of training using auditory stimulation on rhythmic movement in Parkinsonian patients—a combined motor and [18 F]-FDG PET study. Parkinsonism. Relat. Disord. 2006;12:155-164.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.parkreldis.2005.11.002

  103. 103.
  104. 104.

    Arias P, Cudeiro J. Effects of rhythmic sensory stimulation (auditory, visual) on gait in Parkinson’s disease patients. Exp. Brain. Res. 2008;186:589-601.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00221-007-1263-y

  105. 105.

    Picelli A, et al. Three-dimensional motion analysis of the effects of auditory cueing on gait pattern in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a preliminary investigation. Neurol. Sci. 2010;31:423-430.

    Not in our library10.1007/s10072-010-0228-2

  106. 106.

    Frazzitta G, Maestri R, Uccellini D, Bertotti G, Abelli P. Rehabilitation treatment of gait in patients with Parkinson’s disease with freezing: a comparison between two physical therapy protocols using visual and auditory cues with or without treadmill training. Mov. Disord. 2009;24:1139-1143.

    Not in our library10.1002/mds.22491

  107. 107.

    McIntosh GC, Brown SH, Rice RR, Thaut MH. Rhythmic auditory-motor facilitation of gait patterns in patients with Parkinson’s disease. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psych. 1997;62:22-26.

    Not in our library10.1136/jnnp.62.1.22

  108. 108.

    Thaut MH, et al. Rhythmic auditory stimulation in gait training for Parkinson’s disease patients. Movement disorders: official journal of the Movement Disorder Society. 1996;11:193-200.

    Not in our library10.1002/mds.870110213

  109. 109.

    Lohnes CA, Earhart GM. The impact of attentional, auditory, and combined cues on walking during single and cognitive dual tasks in Parkinson disease. Gait. Posture. 2011;33:478-483.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.12.029

  110. 110.

    Chester EL, Turnbull GI, Kozey J. The effect of auditory cues on gait at different stages of parkinson’s disease and during “on”/“off” fluctuations: a preliminary study. Top. Geriatr. Rehabil. 2006;22:187-195.

    Not in our library10.1097/00013614-200604000-00010

  111. 111.

    Bryant M, Rintala D, Lai E, Protas E. An evaluation of self-administration of auditory cueing to improve gait in people with Parkinson’s disease. Clin. Rehabil. 2009;23:1078-1085.

    Not in our library10.1177/0269215509337465

  112. 112.

    del Olmo MF, Cudeiro J. Temporal variability of gait in Parkinson disease: Effectsof a rehabilitation programme based on rhythmic sound cues. Parkinsonism. Relat. Disord. 2005;11:25-33.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.parkreldis.2004.09.002

  113. 113.

    Harro C, et al. The effects of speed-dependent treadmill training and rhythmic auditory-cued overground walking on balance function, fall incidence, and quality of life in individuals with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease: A randomized controlled trial. NeuroRehabilitation. 2014;34:541-556.

    Not in our library10.3233/nre-141048

  114. 114.

    Hausdorff JM, et al. Rhythmic auditory stimulation modulates gait variability in Parkinson’s disease. Euro. J. Neurosci. 2007;26:2369-2375.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1460-9568.2007.05810.x

  115. 115.

    Suteerawattananon M, Morris G, Etnyre B, Jankovic J, Protas E. Effects of visual and auditory cues on gait in individuals with Parkinson’s disease. J. Neurol. Sci. 2004;219:63-69.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jns.2003.12.007

  116. 116.

    Baker K, Rochester L, Nieuwboer A. The immediate effect of attentional, auditory, and a combined cue strategy on gait during single and dual tasks in Parkinson’s disease. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2007;88:1593-1600.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.apmr.2007.07.026

  117. 117.

    Baker K, Rochester L, Nieuwboer A. The effect of cues on gait variability—Reducing the attentional cost of walking in people with Parkinson’s disease. Parkinsonism. Relat. Disord. 2008;14:314-320.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.parkreldis.2007.09.008

  118. 118.

    Chen JL, Zatorre RJ, Penhune VB. Interactions between auditory and dorsal premotor cortex during synchronization to musical rhythms. Neuroimage. 2006;32:1771-1781.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.04.207

  119. 119.

    Rochester L, et al. The effect of external rhythmic cues (auditory and visual) on walking during a functional task in homes of people with Parkinson’s disease. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2005;86:999-1006.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.apmr.2004.10.040

  120. 120.

    Nieuwboer A, et al. Impact of a therapeutic cueing program in the home on gait related mobility in Parkinson’s disease. A randomised clinical trial. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry. 2007;78:134-140.

    Not in our library10.1136/jnnp.200x.097923

  121. 121.

    Rochester L, et al. The attentional cost of external rhythmical cues and their impact on gait in Parkinson’s disease: effect of cue modality and task complexity. J. Neural. Transm. 2007;114:1243.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00702-007-0756-y

  122. 122.

    Pau, M. et al. effects of Physical rehabilitation integrated with rhythmic auditory stimulation on spatio-Temporal and Kinematic Parameters of gait in Parkinson’s Disease. Front. Neurol. 7 (2016).

    Not in our library10.3389/fneur.2016.00126

  123. 123.

    Song J, et al. Rhythmic auditory stimulation with visual stimuli on motor and balance function of patients with Parkinson’s disease. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2015;19:2001-2007.

    Not in our library

  124. 124.

    Song G-b, Ryu H. J. Effects of gait training with rhythmic auditory stimulation on gait ability in stroke patients. J. Phys. Ther. Sci. 2016;28:1403-1406.

    Not in our library10.1589/jpts.28.1403

  125. 125.

    Rochester L, et al. The effect of cueing therapy on single and dual‐task gait in a drug naïve population of people with Parkinson’s disease in northern Tanzania. Mov. Disord. 2010;25:906-911.

    Not in our library10.1002/mds.22978

  126. 126.

    De Icco, R. et al. Acute and chronic effect of acoustic and visual cues on gait training in Parkinson’s disease: a randomized, controlled study. Parkinsons. Dis.2015 (2015).

    Not in our library10.1155/2015/978590

  127. 127.

    Morris ME, Martin CL, Schenkman ML. Striding out with Parkinson disease: evidence-based physical therapy for gait disorders. Phys. Ther. 2010;90:280.

    Not in our library10.2522/ptj.20090091

  128. 128.

    Morris ME, Iansek R, Matyas TA, Summers JJ. The pathogenesis of gait hypokinesia in Parkinson’s disease. Brain. 1994;117:1169-1181.

    Not in our library10.1093/brain/117.5.1169

  129. 129.

    Wearden JH, et al. Stimulus timing by people with Parkinson’s disease. Brain. Cogn. 2008;67:264-279.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.bandc.2008.01.010

  130. 130.

    Skodda S, Flasskamp A, Schlegel U. Instability of syllable repetition as a model for impaired motor processing: is Parkinson’s disease a “rhythm disorder. J. Neural. Transm. 2010;117:605-612.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00702-010-0390-y

  131. 131.

    Thaut MH, McIntosh KW, McIntosh GC, Hoemberg V. Auditory rhythmicity enhances movement and speech motor control in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Funct. Neurol. 2001;16:163-172.

    Not in our library

  132. 132.

    Kotz, S. A. & Schwartze, M. Differential input of the supplementary motor area to a dedicated temporal processing network: functional and clinical implications. Front. Integrat. Neurosci. 5 (2011).

    Not in our library10.3389/fnint.2011.00086

  133. 133.

    Elsinger CL, et al. Neural basis for impaired time reproduction in Parkinson’s disease: an fMRI study. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 2003;9:1088-1098.

    Not in our library10.1017/s1355617703970123

  134. 134.

    Rubinstein TC, Giladi N, Hausdorff JM. The power of cueing to circumvent dopamine deficits: a review of physical therapy treatment of gait disturbances in Parkinson’s disease. Mov. Disord. 2002;17:1148-1160.

    Not in our library10.1002/mds.10259

  135. 135.

    Tierney A, Kraus N. The ability to move to a beat is linked to the consistency of neural responses to sound. Journal of Neuroscience. 2013;33:14981-14988.

    Not in our library10.1523/jneurosci.0612-13.2013

  136. 136.

    Debaere F, Wenderoth N, Sunaert S, Van Hecke P, Swinnen SP. Internal vs external generation of movements: differential neural pathways involved in bimanual coordination performed in the presence or absence of augmented visual feedback. Neuroimage. 2003;19:764-776.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1053-8119(03)00148-4

  137. 137.

    Asanuma H, Keller A. Neuronal mechanisms of motor learning in mammals. Neuroreport. 1991;2:217-224.

    Not in our library10.1097/00001756-199105000-00001

  138. 138.

    Suh JH, et al. Effect of rhythmic auditory stimulation on gait and balance in hemiplegic stroke patients. NeuroRehabilitation. 2014;34:193-199.

    Not in our library10.3233/nre-131008

  139. 139.

    Torres EB, Heilman KM, Poizner H. Impaired endogenously evoked automated reaching in Parkinson’s disease. J. Neurosci. 2011;31:17848-17863.

    Not in our library10.1523/jneurosci.1150-11.2011

  140. 140.

    Rinehart NJ, et al. An examination of movement kinematics in young people with high-functioning autism and Asperger’s disorder: further evidence for a motor planning deficit. J. Autism. Dev. Disord. 2006;36:757-767.

    Not in our library10.1007/s10803-006-0118-x

  141. 141.

    Hanakawa, T., Fukuyama, H., Katsumi, Y., Honda, M. & Shibasaki, H. Enhanced lateral premotor activity during paradoxical gait in Parkinson’s disease. Ann. Neurol.45, 329–336 (1999).

    Not in our library10.1002/1531-8249(199903)45:3<329::aid-ana8>3.0.co;2-s

  142. 142.

    Cunnington R, Iansek R, Bradshaw JL, Phillips JG. Movement-related potentials in Parkinson’s disease. Brain: J. Neurol. 1995;118:935-950.

    Not in our library10.1093/brain/118.4.935

  143. 143.

    Whitall J, et al. Bilateral and unilateral arm training improve motor function through differing neuroplastic mechanisms a singleblinded randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil. Neural. Repair. 2011;25:118-129.

    Not in our library10.1177/1545968310380685

  144. 144.

    Ford MP, Malone LA, Nyikos I, Yelisetty R, Bickel CS. Gait training with progressive external auditory cueing in persons with Parkinson’s disease. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2010;91:1255-1261.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.apmr.2010.04.012

  145. 145.

    Thaut MH, et al. Rhythmic auditory stimulation improves gait more than NDT/Bobath training in near-ambulatory patients early poststroke: a single-blind, randomized trial. Neurorehabil. Neural. Repair. 2007;21:455-459.

    Not in our library10.1177/1545968307300523

  146. 146.

    Marsden CD. Problems with long-term levodopa therapy for Parkinson’s disease. Clin. Neuropharmacol. 1994;17(Suppl 2):S32-44.

    Not in our library

  147. 147.

    Curtze C, Nutt JG, Carlson-Kuhta P, Mancini M, Horak FB. Levodopa is a Double-Edged Sword for Balance and Gait in People with Parkinson’s Disease. Mov. Disord. 2015;30:1361-1370.

    Not in our library10.1002/mds.26269

  148. 148.

    Bryant MS, Rintala DH, Hou JG, Lai EC, Protas EJ. Effects of Levodopa on Forward and Backward Gait Patterns in Persons with Parkinson’s Disease. NeuroRehabilitation. 2011;29:247-252.

    Not in our library10.3233/nre-2011-0700

  149. 149.

    Hausdorff JM, Cudkowicz ME, Firtion R, Wei JY, Goldberger AL. Gait variability and basal ganglia disorders: Stride‐tostride variations of gait cycle timing in parkinson’s disease and Huntington’s disease. Movement disorders. 1998;13:428-437.

    Not in our library10.1002/mds.870130310

  150. 150.

    Schaafsma JD, et al. Gait dynamics in Parkinson’s disease: relationship to Parkinsonian features, falls and response to levodopa. J. Neurol. Sci. 2003;212:47-53.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0022-510x(03)00104-7

  151. 151.

    Baltadjieva R, Giladi N, Gruendlinger L, Peretz C, Hausdorff JM. Marked alterations in the gait timing and rhythmicity of patients with de novo Parkinson’s disease. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2006;24:1815-1820.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.05033.x

  152. 152.

    Almeida QJ, Frank JS, Roy EA, Patla AE, Jog MS. Dopaminergic modulation of timing control and variability in the gait of Parkinson’s disease. Mov. Disord. 2007;22:1735-1742.

    Not in our library10.1002/mds.21603

  153. 153.

    Fahn S. Does levodopa slow or hasten the rate of progression of Parkinson’s disease? J. Neurol. 2005;252(Suppl 4):Iv37-iv42.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00415-005-4008-5

  154. 154.

    Levy G. The relationship of Parkinson disease with aging. Arch. Neurol. 2007;64:1242-1246.

    Not in our library10.1001/archneur.64.9.1242

  155. 155.

    Thaut MH, et al. Neurologic music therapy improves executive function and emotional adjustment in traumatic brain injury rehabilitation. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2009;1169:406-416.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04585.x

  156. 156.

    Delignières D, Torre K, et al. Fractal dynamics of human gait: a reassessment of the 1996 data of Hausdorff. J. Appl. Physiol. 2009;106:1272-1279.

    Not in our library10.1152/japplphysiol.90757.2008

  157. 157.
  158. 158.

    Hausdorff JM, et al. Fractal dynamics of human gait: stability of long-range correlations in stride interval fluctuations. J. Appl. Physiol. 1996;80:1448-1457.

    Not in our library10.1152/jappl.1996.80.5.1448

  159. 159.

    Buchecker, M., Wegenkittl, S., Stöggl, T. & Müller, E. Unstable Footwear Affects Magnitude and Structure of Variability in Postural Control. Motor. Control. 1–35 (2017).

    Not in our library10.1123/mc.2016-0021

  160. 160.

    Clark JE, Phillips SJ. A longitudinal study of intralimb coordination in the first year of independent walking: a dynamical systems analysis. Child. Dev. 1993;64:1143-1157.

    Not in our library10.2307/1131331

  161. 161.

    Tecchio F, Salustri C, Thaut MH, Pasqualetti P, Rossini P. Conscious and preconscious adaptation to rhythmic auditory stimuli: a magnetoencephalographic study of human brain responses. Exp. Brain. Res. 2000;135:222-230.

    Not in our library10.1007/s002210000507

  162. 162.

    Peper CLE, Oorthuizen JK, Roerdink M. Attentional demands of cued walking in healthy young and elderly adults. Gait. Posture. 2012;36:378-382.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.03.032

  163. 163.

    Roerdink M, Bank PJ, Peper CLE, Beek PJ. Walking to the beat of different drums: Practical implications for the use of acoustic rhythms in gait rehabilitation. Gait. Posture. 2011;33:690-694.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.03.001

  164. 164.

    Morris ME, Martin CL, Schenkman ML. Striding Out With Parkinson Disease: Evidence-Based Physical Therapy for Gait Disorders. Phys. Ther. 2010;90:280-288.

    Not in our library10.2522/ptj.20090091

  165. 165.

    Sheridan M, Flowers K. Movement variability and bradykinesia in Parkinson’s disease. Brain: J. Neurol. 1990;113:1149-1161.

    Not in our library10.1093/brain/113.4.1149

  166. 166.

    Williams AJ, Peterson DS, Earhart GM. Gait Coordination in Parkinson Disease: Effects of Step Length and Cadence Manipulations. Gait. Posture. 2013;38:340-344.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.12.009

  167. 167.

    Friedman JH. Fatigue in Parkinson’s disease patients. Curr. Treat. Options. Neurol. 2009;11:186-190.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11940-009-0022-8

  168. 168.

    Nascimento LR, de Oliveira CQ, Ada L, Michaelsen SM, Teixeira-Salmela LF. Walking training with cueing of cadence improves walking speed and stride length after stroke more than walking training alone: a systematic review. J. Physiother. 2015;61:10-15.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jphys.2014.11.015

  169. 169.

    Pate RR, et al. Physical activity and public health: a recommendation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American College of Sports Medicine. JAMA. 1995;273:402-407.

    Not in our library10.1001/jama.1995.03520290054029

  170. 170.

    Poushter, J. Smartphone ownership and internet usage continues to climb in emerging economies. Pew Research Center22 (2016).

    Not in our library

  171. 171.

    Post B, van der Eijk M, Munneke M, Bloem BR. Multidisciplinary care for Parkinson’s disease: not if, but how! Pract. Neurol. 2011;11:58-61.

    Not in our library10.1136/jnnp.2011.241604

  172. 172.

    Bello O, et al. The effects of treadmill or overground walking training program on gait in Parkinson’s disease. Gait. Posture. 2013;38:590-595.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.gaitpost.2013.02.005

  173. 173.

    Fang R, Ye S, Huangfu J, Calimag DP. Music therapy is a potential intervention for cognition of Alzheimer’s Disease: a minireview. Transl. Neurodegener. 2017;6:2.

    Not in our library10.1186/s40035-017-0073-9

  174. 174.

    Hanna-Pladdy B, MacKay A. The Relation Between Instrumental Musical Activity and Cognitive Aging. Neuropsychology. 2011;25:378-386.

    Not in our library10.1037/a0021895

  175. 175.

    Sturman MT, et al. Physical activity, cognitive activity, and cognitive decline in a biracial community population. Arch. Neurol. 2005;62:1750-1754.

    Not in our library10.1001/archneur.62.11.1750

  176. 176.

    Mammarella N, Fairfield B, Cornoldi C. Does music enhance cognitive performance in healthy older adults? The Vivaldi effect. Aging. Clin. Exp. Res. 2007;19:394-399.

    Not in our library10.1007/bf03324720

  177. 177.

    Stork MJ, Kwan MY, Gibala MJ, Martin Ginis KA. Music enhances performance and perceived enjoyment of sprint interval exercise. Med. Sci. Sports. Exerc. 2015;47:1052-1060.

    Not in our library10.1249/mss.0000000000000494

  178. 178.

    Cha Y, Kim Y, Hwang S, Chung Y. Intensive gait training with rhythmic auditory stimulation in individuals with chronic hemiparetic stroke: A pilot randomized controlled study. NeuroRehabilitation. 2014;35:681-688.

    Not in our library10.3233/nre-141182

  179. 179.

    Menon V, Levitin DJ. The rewards of music listening: response and physiological connectivity of the mesolimbic system. Neuroimage. 2005;28:175-184.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.05.053

  180. 180.

    Eliakim M, Meckel Y, Nemet D, Eliakim A. The effect of music during warm-up on consecutive anaerobic performance in elite adolescent volleyball players. Int. J. Sports. Med. 2007;28:321-325.

    Not in our library10.1055/s-2006-924360

  181. 181.

    Crust L. Carry-over effects of music in an isometric muscular endurance task. Percept. Mot. Skills. 2004;98:985-991.

    Not in our library10.2466/pms.98.3.985-991

  182. 182.

    Millington PJ, Myklebust BM, Shambes GM. Biomechanical analysis of the sit-to-stand motion in elderly persons. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 1992;73:609-617.

    Not in our library

  183. 183.

    Peng Y-C, et al. Immediate effects of therapeutic music on loaded sit-to-stand movement in children with spastic diplegia. Gait. Posture. 2011;33:274-278.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.11.020

  184. 184.

    Gaver WW. How do we hear in the world? Explorations in ecological acoustics. Ecol. Psychol. 1993;5:285-313.

    Not in our library10.1207/s15326969eco0504_2

  185. 185.

    Young W, Rodger M, Craig CM. Perceiving and reenacting spatiotemporal characteristics of walking sounds. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2013;39:464.

    Not in our library10.1037/a0029402

  186. 186.

    Effenberg, A. O. In Encyclopedia of Sport and Exercise Psychology Vol. 2 (eds Eklund, R. C. & Tenenbaum, G.) 663–667 (SAGE Publications, 2014).

    Not in our library

  187. 187.

    Ghai, S., Ghai, I., & Effenberg, A. O. “Low road” to rehabilitation. Neuropsychiatr. Dis. Treat. (2017): Accepted, In press.

    Not in our library10.2147/ndt.s153392

  188. 188.

    Rodger MW, Young WR, Craig CM. Synthesis of walking sounds for alleviating gait disturbances in Parkinson’s disease. IEEE. Trans. Neural. Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 2014;22:543-548.

    Not in our library10.1109/tnsre.2013.2285410

  189. 189.

    Schmitz, Gerd, Daniela Kroeger & Alfred, O. Effenberg. A mobile sonification system for stroke rehabilitation. Geo. Ins. Tech. (2014).

    Not in our library

  190. 190.

    Scholz, D. S. et al. Sonification as a possible stroke rehabilitation strategy. Front. Neurosci. 8 (2014).

    Not in our library10.3389/fnins.2014.00332

  191. 191.

    Schmitz, G. & Effenberg, A. O. Schlagmann 2.0–Bewegungsakustische Dimensionen interpersonaler Koordination im Mannschaftssport. Ger. J. Exerc. Sport. Res. 1–14 (2017).

    Not in our library

  192. 192.

    Demos AP, Chaffin R, Begosh KT, Daniels JR, Marsh KL. Rocking to the beat: Effects of music and partner’s movements on spontaneous interpersonal coordination. ‎J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 2012;141:49.

    Not in our library10.1037/a0023843

  193. 193.

    Tagliabue, M. & McIntyre, J. A modular theory of multisensory integration for motor control. Front. Computat. Neurosci. 8 (2014).

    Not in our library10.3389/fncom.2014.00001

  194. 194.

    Hameed S, Ferris T, Jayaraman S, Sarter N. Using informative peripheral visual and tactile cues to support task and interruption management. Hum. Factors. 2009;51:126-135.

    Not in our library10.1177/0018720809336434

  195. 195.

    Hiyamizu M, Morioka S, Shomoto K, Shimada T. Effects of dual task balance training on dual task performance in elderly people: a randomized controlled trial. Clin. Rehabil. 2012;26:58-67.

    Not in our library10.1177/0269215510394222

  196. 196.

    Schenkman M, Morey M, Kuchibhatla M. Spinal flexibility and balance control among community-dwelling adults with and without Parkinson’s disease. J. Gerontol. A. Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2000;55:M441-M445.

    Not in our library10.1093/gerona/55.8.m441

  197. 197.

    Sterling NW, et al. Dopaminergic modulation of arm swing during gait among Parkinson’s disease patients. J. Parkinsons. Dis. 2015;5:141-150.

    Not in our library10.3233/jpd-140447

  198. 198.

    Vaugoyeau M, et al. Axial rotation in Parkinson’s disease. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry. 2006;77:815-821.

    Not in our library10.1136/jnnp.2004.050666

  199. 199.

    Son H, Kim E. Kinematic analysis of arm and trunk movements in the gait of Parkinson’s disease patients based on external signals. J. Phys. Ther. Sci. 2015;27:3783-3786.

    Not in our library10.1589/jpts.27.3783

Cited by papers we hold 2

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.