We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This systematic review primarily aims to identify the optimal physiotherapeutic intervention to improve hand dexterity in Parkinson’s Disease (PD) patients. The secondary objectives were to identify the hand dexterity physiotherapeutic interventions available for PD patients, and to determine the quality of these interventions.
Review Methods:
Eight electronic databases were systematically searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trial full-text articles using the established search strategy. The primary outcomes of interest were measurements for hand dexterity and activities of daily living (ADL).
Results:
A total of 11 studies comprising 647 participants with PD were included. Most studies had a high risk of performance bias and an unclear risk of selection bias. The intervention training period ranged from a single session to 12 weeks. Compared to their respective control group, eight out of 11 studies revealed significant results in hand dexterity, two out of three studies reported positive effects on ADL, four of seven studies showed significant improvements in upper limb motor performance, and two studies perceived positive benefits in terms of overall quality of life. Five out of 11 studies that recorded the occurrence of adverse events reported no adverse events post-intervention.
Conclusion:
The dearth of evidence made it difficult to support any one intervention as the best intervention when compared to the other PD treatments in upper limb rehabilitation. Regardless, a home-based dexterity rehabilitation programme is still a promising approach to enhance dexterity-related functional abilities.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.