Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Exploratory study identifies key factors influencing walking independence in individuals with hereditary ataxias, suggesting targeted interventions.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify functional outcomes related to independence in walking among people affected by hereditary ataxias. METHODS: Sixty participants were selected by convenience in a list provided by an organization of people with ataxia. Sociodemographic and clinical data were collected using a semistructured questionnaire. The Assessment and Rating of Ataxia was used to assess and rate cerebellar ataxia. Changes in body structure and function, limitation in activities, and restriction in participation were evaluated with specific outcome measures. Participants were classified as independent in walking if they were able to walk without walking aids or human assistance and as dependent in walking if they have been using walking aids (sticks, crutches, or walkers) for more than 6 months, using a wheelchair for locomotion most of the day, or both. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted hierarchically and in blocks considering upper limbs function, balance systems, sensory functions, postural control, walking, independence, cognition, and perception as independent variables. The prevalence ratio for walking independence was determined. RESULTS: The final regression model pointed out that gait capacity assessed by the 6-Minute Walk Test and dexterity assessed by the Box and Blocks test were the main markers related to walking independence in individuals with hereditary ataxias. CONCLUSION: The distance covered in 6 minutes of walking (walking endurance) and upper extremity dexterity can be used to better assess the progression of cerebellar disease related to walking independence in individuals with hereditary ataxias. IMPACT: This study supports early detection of individuals who are at risk of loss of walking independence and an optimized rehabilitation plan.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Giangiardi et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: