Cited by 565Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionPhysical Activity and Health

Effectiveness of home-based and remotely supervised aerobic exercise in Parkinson's disease: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

Open access
van der Kolk, Nicolien M, de Vries, Nienke M, Kessels, Roy P C, Joosten, Hilde, Zwinderman, Aeilko H, Post, Bart, Bloem, Bastiaan R·2019·The Lancet Neurology

Abstract

Background High-intensity aerobic exercise might attenuate the symptoms of Parkinson's disease, but high-quality evidence is scarce. Moreover, long-term adherence remains challenging. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of aerobic exercise-gamified and delivered at home, to promote adherence-on relieving motor symptoms in patients with Parkinson's disease with mild disease severity who were on common treatment regimes.Methods In this single-centre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial (Park-in-Shape), we recruited sedentary patients with Parkinson's disease from the outpatient clinic at Radboudumc, Nijmegen, Netherlands. Patients were made aware of the study either by their treating neurologist or via information in the waiting room. Patients could also contact the study team via social media. We included patients aged 30-75 years with a Hoehn and Yahr stage of 2 or lower, who were on stable dopaminergic medication. Patients were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to either aerobic exercise done on a stationary home-trainer (aerobic intervention group) or stretching (active control group) by means of a web-based system with minimisation for sex and medication status (treated or untreated) and permuted blocks of varying sizes of more than two (unknown to study personnel). Patients were only aware of the content of their assigned programme. Assessors were unaware of group assignments. Both interventions were home based, requiring 30-45 min training three times per week for 6 months. Both groups received a motivational app and remote supervision. Home trainers were enhanced with virtual reality software and real-life videos providing a so-called exergaming experience (ie, exercise enhanced by gamified elements). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the Movement Disorders Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) motor section at 6 months, tested during the off state (≥12 h after last dopaminergic medication). The analysis was done on an intention-to-treat basis in patients who completed the follow-up assessment, regardless of whether they completed the assigned intervention. Patients reported adverse events directly to their coach and also after the 6-month visit retrospectively. A between-group difference of 3·5 points or more was deemed a-priori clinically relevant. The study is concluded and registered with the Dutch Trial Registry, NTR4743.Findings Between Feb 2, 2015, and Oct 27, 2017, 139 patients were assessed for eligibility in person, of whom 130 were randomly assigned to either the aerobic intervention group (n=65) or the active control group (n=65). Data from 125 (96%) patients were available for the primary analysis; five patients were lost to follow-up (four in the intervention group; one in the control group). 20 patients (ten in each group) did not complete their assigned programme. The off-state MDS-UPDRS motor score revealed a between-group difference of 4·2 points (95% CI 1·6-6·9, p=0·0020) in favour of aerobic exercise (mean 1·3 points [SE 1·8] in the intervention group and 5·6 points [SE 1·9] for the control group). 11 patients had potentially related adverse events (seven [11%] in the intervention group, four [6%] in the control group) and seven had unrelated serious adverse events (three in the intervention group [vestibilar disorder, vasovagal collapse, knee injury during gardening that required surgery; 6%], four in the control group [supraventricular tachycardia, hip fracture, fall related injury, severe dyskinesias after suprathreshold dose levodopa in a patient with deep brain stimulation; 7%]).Interpretation Aerobic exercise can be done at home by patients with Parkinson's disease with mild disease severity and it attenuates off-state motor signs. Future studies should establish long-term effectiveness and possible disease-modifying effects.Funding Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30285-6

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. van der Kolk NM, de Vries NM, Penko AL, et al. A remotely supervised home-based aerobic exercise programme is feasible for patients with Parkinson's disease: results of a small randomised feasibility trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2018; 89: 1003-05.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van der Kolk, N. M., de Vries, N. M., Kessels, R. P. C., Joosten, H., Zwinderman, A. H., Post, B., & Bloem, B. R.
Affiliations
  • Radboud University Medical Center (NL)
  • Canisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis (NL)
  • Amsterdam University Medical Centers (NL)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
Bloem, Bastiaan R
Venue
The Lancet Neurology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-11
Volume
18
Issue
11
Pages
998-1008
ISSN
1474-4422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2972993683
Cited by
565
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 65 · 2025: 100 · 2024: 111 · 2023: 75 · 2022: 81 · 2021: 67 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
35.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
  • International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society
  • Hersenstichting
  • Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (024.001.006, NCT02655315)
  • UCB
  • Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research
  • Parkinson's Foundation
  • ZonMw (50-52500-98-065)
  • AbbVie
  • Biogen
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
Keywords
Parkinson's disease, aerobic exercise, home-based exercise, exergames, gamification, virtual reality, distant supervision, motor symptoms, exercise adherence, sedentary patients, dopaminergic therapy, adverse events, Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale
MeSH terms
Accidental Falls, Adult, Aged, Antiparkinson Agents, Combined Modality Therapy, Double-Blind Method, Exercise Therapy, Female, Humans, Levodopa, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Parkinson Disease, Patient Compliance, Patient Dropouts, Self Care, Tachycardia, Treatment Outcome, Telemedicine, Deep Brain Stimulation, Muscle Stretching Exercises

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review