A randomized controlled study of whether setting specific goals improves the effectiveness of therapy in people with Parkinson’s disease

Abstract

Objective:

To evaluate the effects of an intervention based on a specific set of goals on goal attainment, manual dexterity, hand grip strength and finger prehension force compared to a standardized approach in patients with Parkinson’s disease.

Design:

Randomized controlled trial.

Setting:

Home-based.

Participants:

Fifty patients with a clinical diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease acknowledging impaired manual ability were randomized into two groups.

Interventions:

Patients in the experimental group (n = 25) were included in an intervention focused on task components that involved goals proposed by participants. Patients in the control group (n = 25) received a standard intervention focused on impairments in range of motion, grasp and manipulation. Home condition and duration (four weeks, twice a week) were similar in both groups.

Main outcome measures:

The primary outcome measure was goal achievement assessed with the Goal Attainment Scaling. Secondary outcomes were manual dexterity evaluated with the Purdue Pegboard Test and hand grip strength and finger prehension force assessed using a dynamometer.

Results:

After four weeks, significant between-group improvement in goal attainment was observed in the experimental group (change 17.36 ± 7.48 vs. 4.03 ± 6.43, P < 0.001). Compared to the control group, the experimental group also showed a significant improvement (P < 0.05) in manual dexterity (postintervention values in the most affected arm 10.55 ± 1.95 vs. 7.33 ± 3.63 pins, P < 0.001) and finger prehension force (postintervention values in the most affected arm 8.03 ± 1.93 vs. 6.31 ± 1.85 kg, P = 0.010).

Conclusions:

Targeting therapy toward specific goals leads to greater changes in arm function than a standardized approach in people with Parkinson’s disease.

Keywords

Goals Parkinson’s disease upper extremity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Siegert

O’Connell

Levack

WMM

. Rehabilitation goal setting: theory, practice and evidence. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2015.

Locke

Latham

GP.

Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. A 35-year odyssey. Am Psychol 2002; 57(9): 705–717.

Wade

DT.

Goal planning in stroke rehabilitation: how?

Topics Stroke Rehabil 1999; 6(2): 16–36.

Rosewilliam

Roskell

Pandyan

AD.

A systematic review and synthesis of the quantitative and qualitative evidence behind patient-centred goal setting in stroke rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil 2011; 25(6): 501–514.

Sugavanam

Mead

Bulley

et al . The effects and experiences of goal setting in stroke rehabilitation—a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil 2012; 35(3): 177–190.

Prescott

Fleming

Doig

Goal setting approaches and principles used in rehabilitation for people with acquired brain injury: a systematic scoping review. Brain Inj 2015; 29(13–14): 1515–1529.

Reuben

Tinetti

ME.

Goal-oriented patient care—an alternative health outcomes paradigm. N Engl J Med 2012; 366(9): 777–779.

Timmermans

Spooren

Kingma

et al . Influence of task-oriented training content on skilled arm-hand performance in stroke: a systematic review. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2010; 24(9): 858–870.

Grace

Floresco

Goto

et al . Regulation of firing of dopaminergic neurons and control of goal-directed behaviors. Trends Neurosci 2007; 30(5): 220–227.

10.

Westbrook

Frank

Dopamine and proximity in motivation and cognitive control. Curr Opin Behav Sci 2018; 22: 28–34.

11.

Redgrave

Rodriguez

Smith

et al . Goal-directed and habitual control in the basal ganglia: implications for Parkinson’s disease. Nat Rev Neurosci 2010; 11(11): 760–762.

12.

Goto

Grace

AA.

Dopaminergic modulation of limbic and cortical drive of nucleus accumbens in goal-directed behavior. Nat Neurosci 2005; 8(6): 805–812.

13.

Hughes

Daniel

Kilford

et al . Accuracy of clinical diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson’s disease: a clinico-pathological study of 100 cases. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1992; 55(3): 181–184.

14.

Hoehn

Yahr

MD.

Parkinsonism: onset, progression, and mortality. Neurology 1998; 50(2): 318.

15.

Oxford Grice

Vogel

et al . Adult norms for a commercially available Nine-hole Peg Test for finger dexterity. Am J Occup Ther 2003; 57(5): 570–573.

16.

Yip

Gorman

Stadnyk

et al . A standardized menu for goal attainment scaling in the care of frail elders. Gerontologist 1998; 38(6): 735–742.

17.

Krasny-Pacini

Hiebel

Pauly

et al . Goal attainment scaling in rehabilitation: a literature-based update. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 2013; 56(3): 212–230.

18.

Bovend’Eerdt

Botell

Wade

DT.

Writing SMART rehabilitation goals and achieving goal attainment scaling: a practical guide. Clin Rehabil 2009; 23(4): 352–361.

19.

Turner-Stokes

Goal attainment scaling (GAS) in rehabilitation: a practical guide. Clin Rehabil 2009; 23(4): 362–370.

20.

Gallus

Mathiowetz

Test-retest reliability of the Purdue Pegboard for persons with multiple sclerosis. Am J Occup Ther 2003; 57(1): 108–111.

21.

MacDermid

Kramer

Woodbury

et al . Interrater reliability of pinch and grip strength measurements in patients with cumulative trauma disorders. J Hand Ther 1994; 7(1): 10–14.

22.

Hurn

Kneebone

Cropley

Goal setting as an outcome measure: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil 2006; 20(9): 756–772.

23.

Smiley-Oyen

Lowry

Emerson

QR.

Learning and retention of movement sequences in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 2006; 21(8): 1078–1087.

24.

Mak

Hui-Chan

CW.

Cued task-specific training is better than exercise in improving sit-to-stand in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a randomized controlled trial. Mov Disord 2008; 23(4): 501–509.

25.

Proteau

Marteniuk

Lévesque

A sensorimotor basis for motor learning: evidence indicating specificity of practice. Q J Exp Psychol 1992; 44(3): 557–575.

26.

Hadj-Bouziane

Benatru

Brovelli

et al . Advanced Parkinson’s disease effect on goal-directed and habitual processes involved in visuomotor associative learning. Front Hum Neurosci 2013; 6: 351.

27.

Doyon

Motor sequence learning and movement disorders. Curr Opin Neurol 2008; 21(4): 478–483.

28.

Kwakkel

van Peppen

Wagenaar

et al . Effects of augmented exercise therapy time after stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke 2004; 35(11): 2529–2539.

29.

Niewboer

Rochester

Müncks

et al . Motor learning in Parkinson’s disease: limitations and potential for rehabilitation. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2009; 15(suppl. 3): s53–s58.

30.

Baskett

Broad

Reekie

et al . Shared responsibility for ongoing rehabilitation: a new approach to home-based therapy after stroke. Clin Rehabil 1999; 13(1): 23–33.

31.

Vercruysse

Spildooren

Heremans

et al . Abnormalities and cue dependence of rhythmical upper-limb movements in Parkinson patients with freezing of gait. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2012; 26(6): 636–645.

32.

Dwamena

Holmes-Rovner

Gaulden

et al . Interventions for providers to promote a patient-centred approach in clinical consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 12: CD003267.

33.

Mastos

Miller

Eliasson

et al . Goal-directed training: linking theories of treatment to clinical practice for improved functional activities in daily life. Clin Rehabil 2007; 21(1): 47–55.

34.

Cano-de-la-Cuerda

Molero-Sánchez

Carratalá-Tejada

et al . Theories and control models and motor learning: clinical applications in neuro-rehabilitation. Neurologia 2015; 30(1): 32–41.