Ahmed Hifza, Riaz Ulvina, Sadia Haleema, Khalil Rimsha, Javed Zuha, Ayub Ishal
Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Faisalabad, Faisalabad, Pakistan.
Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Government College University Faisalabad, Faisalabad, Pakistan.
Physiother Res Int. 2025 Jul;30(3):e70068. doi: 10.1002/pri.70068.
The term ataxia refers to the inability to coordinate movement. It essentially happens when the cerebellum or any of its connections are damaged. A brain tumor, multiple sclerosis, stroke, cerebral palsy, certain drugs, and genetic illnesses are the few examples of the ailments that can result in ataxia. Although aerobic exercise helps ataxic people in decreasing whole disease severity, conventional training does not significantly aid in this regard. On the other hand, circuit training has also proved effective in reducing ataxic symptoms in some literatures.
This study's primary goal was to ascertain whether aerobic or circuit training provides a better course of treatment for the ataxic patients.
Eighteen pre-diagnosed ataxic patients participated in a randomized clinical experiment (9 patients in each group) for this objective. Purposive sampling technique was used to collect samples, and patients were allocated into their groups using the lottery method. Group A was aerobic training group and Group B was circuit training group. The time duration for this study was approximately 4 months where data collection took almost 1 month. 30 min sessions consisting of 5 sessions per week were given to the patients for 1 month duration. Data were calculated from Allied hospital. Assessment and examination were carried out using Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and Functional staging for ataxia giving pre- and post-values.
Data were analyzed statistically through SPSS 24.
In terms of indicating balance along with ataxia staging, the statistics showed only a slight difference in the aerobic training group than in the circuit training group. The given differences found between the pre and the post values in mean and standard deviation in Group 1 is -11.75 ± 1.48 and in Group 2 is -9.55 ± 3.67. The first treatment group had a mean rank of 9.50 prior to treatment and 7.50 following treatment. Conversely, the mean rank of the second treatment group was 10.33 at the post-treatment level and 9.50 at the pre-treatment level.
In essence, these two tactics performed better than some other therapy approaches on a consistent basis. Although there have not been enough studies to compare these two treatments, their respective outcomes are enough to show their effectiveness. Eventually, the aerobic intervention was found only marginally superior to the circuit training, while both were helpful for improving balance in ataxia.
This study used a randomized clinical trial research design. It has been registered in IRCT, that is, the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials under the registration Id IRCT20240323061354N1.
共济失调一词指的是无法协调运动。当小脑或其任何连接受损时，就会出现这种情况。脑瘤、多发性硬化症、中风、脑瘫、某些药物以及遗传疾病是可能导致共济失调的几种疾病。尽管有氧运动有助于共济失调患者降低整体疾病严重程度，但传统训练在这方面并无显著帮助。另一方面，循环训练在一些文献中也已证明对减轻共济失调症状有效。
本研究的主要目的是确定有氧运动或循环训练是否能为共济失调患者提供更好的治疗方案。
18名预先诊断为共济失调的患者参与了为此目的进行的随机临床试验（每组9名患者）。采用目的抽样技术收集样本，并使用抽签法将患者分配到各组。A组为有氧运动组，B组为循环训练组。本研究的时长约为4个月，其中数据收集耗时近1个月。为期1个月，每周为患者安排5节、每节30分钟的课程。数据来自联合医院。使用伯格平衡量表（BBS）和共济失调功能分期进行评估和检查，并给出前后值。
通过SPSS 24对数据进行统计分析。
在表明平衡以及共济失调分期方面，统计数据显示有氧运动组与循环训练组之间仅有细微差异。第1组前后均值和标准差的差值为-11.75±1.48，第2组为-9.55±3.67。第一个治疗组治疗前的平均秩次为9.50，治疗后为7.50。相反，第二个治疗组治疗后的平均秩次为10.33，治疗前为9.50。
从本质上讲，这两种方法在持续表现上比其他一些治疗方法更好。尽管尚无足够研究来比较这两种治疗方法，但它们各自取得的结果足以表明其有效性。最终发现有氧运动干预仅略优于循环训练，而两者都有助于改善共济失调患者的平衡能力。
本研究采用随机临床试验研究设计。已在伊朗临床试验注册中心（IRCT）注册，注册号为IRCT20240323061354N1。
