The document summarizes a study that evaluated gait parameters in diabetic patients walking on different surfaces and compared them to healthy controls. The study found that diabetic patients without neuropathy already exhibited altered gait compared to controls, and gait alterations increased with disease severity and neuropathy. Challenging walking environments like uneven surfaces better revealed gait issues in diabetic patients. This suggests their walking ability and fall risk is impacted early in the disease.
Gait alterations in diabetic patients on different surfaces
1. Gait alterations of diabetic patients while walking on different surfaces L. Allet , S. Armand, B. Le Callennec, K. Aminian, R. de Bie, D. Monnin, A. Golay, E. de Bruin Kinésithérapie, Le congrès Paris 2009
2.
3. Diabetic patients have an increased risk for injurious falls ( Miller, D.K 1999 ) The cause of increased fall risk in diabetic patients is still under debate (Allet, L. 2008) Since peripheral neuropathy affects both sensory and motor functions the resulting neuromuscular damage may result in altered lower extremity biomechanics (Kwon, O.Y 2003) Background :
Diabetic patients have an increased risk for injurious falls ( Miller, D.K 1994 ) The cause of increased fall risk in diabetic patients is still under debate (Allet, L. 2008) Since peripheral neuropathy affects both sensory and motor functions the resulting neuromuscular damage may result in altered lower extremity biomechanics (Kwon, O.Y 2003)
Comparable for age, height and body weight (p > 0.05)
Bodenbeschaffenheiten
Equipment with the Physilog1 system. Gait analysis was performed using four miniature gyroscopes (ADXRS 250, Analog device) attached to each shank and thigh. Each sensor measured the velocity of the angular rotation per segment around the coronal axis (flexion-extension). (b) Raw data recorded with the Physilog1 and its interpretation. Angular velocity recorded from shank segments during successive gait cycles. The detection of heel-strikes (*) and toeoffs (&) enables the estimation of stance phase (black zone) and double support periods (grey zone).
No difference for age, height and body weight (p > 0.05). Diabetic patients’ gait parameters differed significantly from those of healthy controls (p ≤ 0.05) . Analysis revealed significant differences between healthy individuals and patients with neuropathy, and between healthy persons and patients without neuropathy. No difference was observed between patients with or without neuropathy. The surface effect was most important in patients with diabetic neuropathy, followed by patients without neuropathy and healthy controls.
The surface altered significantly all gait parameters (except stance and double support time) Diabetic patients with and without neuropathy as well as healthy controls adjusted to the variety of different surfaces using identical strategies. In general the surface altered significantly all gait parameters except of the stance and double support time.
No change between patients with and without NP
However, the vibration perception threshold test (19) we used to attribute patients to either the neuropathic or non neuropathic group did not permit us to study such a relationship. For this reason a more sensitive sensory examination such as the PSSD or the electroneuromyography (ENMG) (25) would have been necessary
However, the vibration perception threshold test (19) we used to attribute patients to either the neuropathic or non neuropathic group did not permit us to study such a relationship. For this reason a more sensitive sensory examination such as the PSSD or the electroneuromyography (ENMG) (25) would have been necessary
However, the vibration perception threshold test (19) we used to attribute patients to either the neuropathic or non neuropathic group did not permit us to study such a relationship. For this reason a more sensitive sensory examination such as the PSSD or the electroneuromyography (ENMG) (25) would have been necessary