Efficacy of Specific Trunk Exercises in the Balance Dysfunction of Patients with Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Citation: López-Liria, R.; Vega-Tirado, S.; Valverde-Martínez, M.Á.; Calvache-Mateo, A.; Martínez-Martínez, A.M.; Rocamora-Pérez, P. Efficacy of Specific Trunk Exercises in the Balance Dysfunction of Patients with Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sensors 2023,23, 1817. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/s23041817 Academic Editor: Brett Fling Received: 1 December 2022 Revised: 18 January 2023 Accepted: 23 January 2023 Published: 6 February 2023 Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). sensors Review Efficacy of Specific Trunk Exercises in the Balance Dysfunction of Patients with Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Remedios López-Liria 1, Sofía Vega-Tirado 2, MaríaÁngeles Valverde-Martínez 1,*, Andrés Calvache-Mateo 3, Ana María Martínez-Martínez 4and Patricia Rocamora-Pérez 1,* 1Health Research Centre, Department of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Medicine, University of Almería, Carretera del Sacramento s/n, 04120 La Cañada de San Urbano, Almería, Spain 2Hum-498 Research Team, University of Almería, 04120 La Cañada de San Urbano, Almería, Spain 3Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Granada, Av. De la Ilustración 60, 18016 Granada, Granada, Spain 4Department of Education, University of Almería, 04120 La Cañada de San Urbano, Almería, Spain *Correspondence: [email protected] (M.Á.V.-M.); [email protected] (P.R.-P.) Abstract: Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative pathology classified as a movement disorder. Physical exercise within a physiotherapy program is an important element to improve postural stability, balance and mobility in order to reduce falls in people with PD. The aim of this work was to determine the efficacy of specific balance and trunk mobility exercises, as well as their benefits for and effects on patients with idiopathic PD. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA standards. The search was performed in five databases: Cochrane Library, SciELO, PEDro, Scopus and PubMed, in February 2022 with the following descriptors: Parkinson’s disease, trunk, exercise, therapy and physical therapy. The inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) over the last ten years. A meta-analysis on static and dynamic balance was conducted with the software Review Manager. Nine articles met the objectives and inclusion criteria, with a total of 240 participants. The trials had moderate methodological quality according to the PEDro scale. The studies included differed with regard to intervention protocol and outcome measures. Finally, eight studies were included in a quantitative analysis in which it was shown that trunk-specific exercises interventions did not significantly improve static balance (SMD = − 0.10, 95% CI = − 0.29, 0.08; p= 0.28) or dynamic balance (SMD = 0.64 95% CI = − 0.24, 1.52; p= 0.15). However, significant differences were found in static balance measured subjectively using the Berg Balance Scale (SMD = − 0.52, 95% CI = − 1.01, − 0.02; p= 0.04). Although some differences were not significant, the studies included in this systematic review consider that specific trunk exercises or balance training combined with muscle strengthening in patients with idiopathic PD should be a complement to pharmacological treatment for improving balance dysfunction and postural instability, preventing falls and promoting wellness. Keywords: Parkinson’s disease; trunk exercises; physical therapy 1. Introduction Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative pathology classified as a movement disorder [ 1 – 3 ]. The etiology is still not well defined; it is complex and involves both environmental and genetic factors (5–10%). In recent years, it has been determined that both old age and being male are the factors that most influence an increased risk of suffering from PD [1,4]. Parkinson’s disease is the second most prevalent neurodegenerative disease among the adult population following Alzheimer’s. By 2040, it is forecasted that more than 12 million people in the world will be affected by PD, having a severe impact not only on their Sensors 2023,23, 1817. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23041817 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors Sensors 2023,23, 1817 2 of 17 quality of life, but also economically, as a result of the healthcare resources devoted to this issue [ 5 , 6 ]. The average survival time is 11 to 15.8 years, the main causes of death being pneumonia (11–28%), cardiovascular diseases (12–19%) and cancer (12–14%) [6]. There is no test capable of distinguishing PD from other disorders with similar clinical symptoms; its diagnosis is mainly based on clinical criteria [ 1 , 7 ]. The most widely accepted diagnostic criteria were introduced by the United Kingdom (UK) Parkinson Disease Society—Brain Bank, including four cardinal signs: bradykinesia–akinesia, resting tremor, rigidity and postural instability [ 8 ]. However, in 2015, the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society (MDS) proposed nine criteria, recognizing non-motor symptoms (NMS) as essential concepts related to the disease [9,10]. PD patients can display motor symptoms (MS) such as bradykinesia, rigidity, tremors, gait freezing, movement disorders, postural instability, abnormal axial posture, axial rigidity and NMS (psychiatric symptoms, depression, dementia, psychosis) [ 9 , 10 ]. These symptoms do not develop until approximately 50–60% of the nigral neurons are lost and about 80–85% of the dopamine content in the corpus striatum has demised [1,11]. As the disease progresses, MS increase the risk of falls and recurring falls [ 12 ]. Moreover, NMS progress slowly and results in disability and greater dependency [13]. The trunk plays an important role in combatting the threats of PD to postural control. Static balance performance and poor gait can be related with trunk muscles in these patients [ 14 ]. According to studies, postural instability and falls are more frequent among individuals with worse trunk mobility and axial rigidity [ 15 ]. Almost 75% of falls in Parkinson’s Disease occur due to the inability to control the mass of the body during the performance of activities, such as turning around, standing up and bending forward [16]. The beginning of postural instability in PD affects postural control and balance, as it retards the automatic postural responses, primarily due to body rigidity (i.e., poor arm swing during gait, and the tendency of the head to remain aligned with the body during turns) [17]. Managing PD is complex, depending on the stage of the disease and its diverse symptomology. For this reason, therapy must be individualized and adapted to each patient [ 7 ]. The physical and therapeutic exercise involved in physical therapy constitutes a key element, along with current medical and pharmacological treatments (e.g., dopamine agonists, levodopa therapy and/or anticholinergic drugs), to improve postural stability, balance and mobility, thereby reducing falls. Levodopa and deep brain stimulation are known to be relatively ineffective at managing the symptoms that affect balance [ 18 ]. Therefore, physical therapy is essential and must be undertaken as early as possible. For example, both the improvement of maximum excursion (i.e., forward, right and left directions) and decreased axial rigidity may increase the ability of participants to adopt effective anticipatory strategies to avoid falls and have a positive impact on balance performance [7,16,19–21]. The upper part of the body is responsible for two thirds of body weight and its centre of gravity [ 22 ]. Other authors mention that, mechanically, the trunk represents almost 50% of body mass, and that head and trunk control is essential to maintain balance during dynamic tasks [ 23 ]. Notwithstanding, most studies on physical therapy treatments for PD traditionally focus on the muscles of the lower limb, whereas those addressing the neuromuscular control of central segments are scarce [ 24 – 27 ]. It has been reported that the strength of lower limb muscles is predictive and related to independence in the activities of daily living, and the preservation of lumbar lordosis may be one of the factors necessary to maintain the efficient biomechanics of these muscles [ 28 ]. In a recent study [ 29 ], patients with early-stage PD had a deficit of about 20% in force production in lower limb muscle groups compared with age-matched neurologically normal controls. In addition, there is a relative lack of research that aims to understand the deficits related to trunk musculature and its influence on the risk of patients suffering falls. There is an urgent need to evaluate the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions focused on this area and the impact of these treatment techniques on postural stability, looking for conclusive answers across the disease spectrum [ 21 ]. Although several authors have carried out treatments aimed at the trunk, Sensors 2023,23, 1817 3 of 17 whether the focus was on mobility, stretching, endurance or strengthening of the trunk (e.g., Global Postural Re-education; Mezieres physiotherapy; proprioceptive training), no studies have delved into the efficacy of these interventions and their benefits related to balance among PD patients [21,22,30]. Thus, the objective of this review is to determine the effectiveness of specific trunk exercises, as well as their benefits and impacts on static and dynamic balance among idiopathic PD patients. 2. Materials and Methods A systematic review was carried out in February 2022, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) standards [ 31 ]. It was registered in the International prospective register of systematic reviews PROSPERO database (CRD42022322063). An exhaustive search was conducted to find articles published in the last 10 years in five databases (Cochrane Library, SciELO, PEDro, Scopus and PubMed), which were written either in English or Spanish, using the following descriptors: Parkinson’s disease*, “trunk”, “exercise”, “therapy” and “physical therapy”, combined with the boolean operator “AND”. The following PICOS eligibility criteria were used for the selection of the articles (participants, intervention, comparator, outcomes, study design): The participants were individuals clinically diagnosed with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease, at stage ≤4 on the Hoehn and Yahr scale, who were also over 18 years of age. The main intervention consisted of trunk-specific exercises (e.g., strength, elongations, mobility, postural, etc.) carried out alone or integrated with other interventions in the experimental group (EG). The dose, frequency and type of the exercises were not limited. The selected studies compared the specific trunk exercises (EG) with the control group (CG), which took part in any type of intervention based on other parts of the body but the trunk, or no therapy. The primary outcomes were static and dynamic balance; secondary outcomes were motor status, gait and falls. Regarding the study type, all were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Inclusion criteria: RCTs between 2012 and 2022. It is important to search for the most recent evidence for specific trunk exercises in PD, particularly those studies published during the 10 years prior to the protocol for this systematic review, as well as including important outcomes in relation to balance dysfunction. Those articles were accepted in which the EG conducted specific trunk exercises with or without complementary therapy in the cited body segment. Exclusion criteria: Observational or descriptive studies. Not written in English or Spanish. Table 1displays the results of the searches conducted and the selected articles. Table 1. Search strategies in the different databases. Databases and Search Terms Results Selected Articles Cochrane Library 1. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “physical therapy” 2. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “trunk” 3. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “physical therapy” AND “trunk” 4. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “therapy” AND “trunk” 5. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “Exercise” AND “trunk” 292 118 22 61 61 Vasconcellos et al. [14] 2021 Youm et al. [32] 2020 Gandolfi et al. [33] 2019 Hubble et al. [34] 2019 Hubble et al. [35] 2018 Capecci et al. [36] 2014 Sensors 2023,23, 1817 4 of 17 Table 1. Cont. Databases and Search Terms Results Selected Articles SciELO 1. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “physical therapy” 2. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “trunk” 3. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “physical therapy” AND “trunk” 4. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “therapy” AND “trunk” 5. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “Exercise” AND “trunk” 33 5 1 1 0 PEDro 1. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “physical therapy” 2. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “trunk” 3. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “physical therapy” AND “trunk” 4. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “therapy” AND “trunk” 5. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “Exercise” AND “trunk” 56 24 3 5 14 Vasconcellos et al. [14] 2021 Youm et al. [32] 2020 Gandolfi et al. [33] 2019 Hubble et al. [34] 2019 Hubble et al. [35] 2018 Paolucci et al. [36] 2017 Scopus 1. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “physical therapy” 2. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “trunk” 3. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “physical therapy” AND “trunk” 4. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “therapy” AND “trunk” 5. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “Exercise” AND “trunk” 948 644 30 135 67 Vasconcellos et al. [14] 2021 Cabrera et al. [16] 2020 Terrens et al. [37] 2020 Youm et al. [32] 2020 Gandolfi et al. [33] 2019 Hubble et al. [34] 2019 Hubble et al. [35] 2018 Paolucci et al. [38] 2017 Capecci et al. [36] 2014 PubMed 1. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “physical therapy” 2. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “trunk” 3. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “physical therapy” AND “trunk” 4. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “therapy” AND “trunk” 5. Parkinson’s Disease* AND “Exercise” AND “trunk” 255 411 5 44 20 Vasconcellos et al. [14] 2021 Cabrera et al. [16] 2020 Terrens et al. [37] 2020 Youm et al. [32] 2020 Gandolfi et al. [33] 2019 Paolucci et al. [38] 2017 Capecci et al. [36] 2014 Two independent authors (RLL and SVT) selected the titles and abstracts of the articles that fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. When discrepancies arose between the researchers, a third party was consulted (MVM). Finally, the characteristics from each study were extracted independently. The assessment of the methodological quality of the articles included was carried out using the PEDro scale [39]. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan v.5.3; Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Changes from the pre-to post-intervention assessment were obtained directly from the study results. When the data presented in the studies were insufficient for meta-analysis purposes (e.g., means and standard deviation were not provided), the trial authors were contacted for additional data. When authors did not provide standard deviations but did provide p-values or 95% confidence intervals, the Review Manager calculator was used to calculate them [40]. Continuous outcomes were analysed using standardized mean differences because all scales were assumed to measure the same underlying symptom or condition, but some studies measured outcomes on different scales [ 41 , 42 ]. For all outcomes, 95% confidence intervals were calculated. The scoring of the different scales was converted so that all scores were in the same direction. Statistical heterogeneity was examined using I 2 . In addition, we searched for outlier studies using a visual inspection of forest plots. The I 2 value can be interpreted as the proportion of the total observed variation between studies that can be explained by differences between studies and not by sampling error [ 41 , 43 ]. When the meta-analysis was considered homogeneous, i.e., with an I 2 value of less than 75%, a fixed-effect model was used. Sensors 2023,23, 1817 5 of 17 Otherwise, it was considered a heterogeneous meta-analysis and a random-effects model was used. Statistical significance was set as p< 0.05, indicating that the effects differed significantly between the intervention and control groups [ 44 ]. Furthermore, sensitivity analyses were performed, and sources of heterogeneity were explored by excluding trials with a high risk of detection or attrition bias [40]. The meta-analysis used the following centre of pressure (COP) variables in two different postural conditions (double-leg stance with eyes open and eyes closed): sway area, and total, medio-lateral (ML) and anterior-posterior (AP) path lengths and velocities. To improve the statistical power within the meta-analysis, the length and velocity variables were combined, as these are two mathematically analogous variables due to constant trial times within the studies [45]. 3. Results Having conducted the search, 2146 items were initially obtained. After eliminating any duplicate articles, 2045 were analysed for their title and abstract. After a first screening of those studies that were considered potentially relevant, a full-text critical reading of 14 articles was performed, paying special attention to the study and treatment type. Finally, a total of nine articles were determined when meeting the objective and criteria proposed for this review (Figure 1). Eight of these were included in the meta-analysis. Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 19 Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart of article selection process. This section presents the most relevant information for each RCT in relation to the characteristics of the participants, intervention, variables and results (Table 2). Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart of article selection process. Sensors 2023,23, 1817 6 of 17 This section presents the most relevant information for each RCT in relation to the characteristics of the participants, intervention, variables and results (Table 2). Table 2. Brief description of articles selected. Author, Year Type of Study and Participants Characteristics of the Intervention Measured Variables Main Results Vasconcellos [14] 2021 RCT 28 participants EG: 14 CG: 14 EG: Trunk exercise program and pelvic floor muscles. CG: Upper and lower limb exercises. Both groups performed home-based exercises under caregiver supervision. Protocol described by Silva and Motta. Duration: 3 times/daily/3 weeks. Static balance (stabilometry), using a force platform connected to an external amplifier and a motion analysis system. Gait evaluated using the Qualisys®movement analysis system. No intragroup differences were observed for the COP range (p= 0.353), COP velocity (p= 0.318) or gait measurements (p= 0.778). Trunk-strengthening exercises failed to improve gait and balance compared to limb exercises. A total of 33% failure to complete treatment (9 individuals). The absence of face-to-face therapist supervision may have affected patients’ performance during interventions. Cabrera [16] 2020 RCT 44 participants EG: 22 CG: 22 EG: 24 sessions core stabilization training program. CG: active joint mobilization, muscle stretching and motor coordination exercises. Duration: 45 min./day, three times/week/8 weeks. Dynamic balance with Mini-BesTest and standing balance with posturography using the Nintendo Wii (maximal excursion of COP during the Modified Clinical Test of Sensory Interaction on Balance and the Limits of Stability test); Balance confidence (ABC Scale). A significant improvement in dynamic balance was observed in the EG compared to the CG (p= 0.002); in self-perceived confidence related to balance (p= 0.047); and maximal excursion of COP in forward (p= 0.048), left (p= 0.010), right (p= 0.046) between-group differences. A core stability program may influence anticipatory postural adjustments. Terrens [37] 2020 Pilot Trial 30 participants (G1) 11 (G2) 10 (G3) 9 (G1) Halliwick aquatic exercises (trunk mobility, core stabilization and rotational exercises); (G2) traditional aquatic and (G3) land-based physiotherapy. Duration: 60 min./week/ 12 weeks. Balance (BBS and Mini BesTest), Falls (mFES), Motor status (UPDRS-III). No significant differences within groups were found in UPDRS-III, BBS or mFES scores post-intervention for any groups. Halliwick aquatic group improved significantly in the Mini BesTest post-intervention, i.e., promising results for balance (p= 0.011). Youm [32] 2020 RCT 23 participants EG: 12 CG: 11 EG: trunk resistance and stretching exercise program. CG: no intervention. Duration: 60–90 min., 3 times/week, 12 weeks. Trunk mobility scale (TMS test), FFT, TUG, standing balance test with a platform, and sit-to-walk test with Nexus software. The EG showed improvements in FFT, trunk mobility, standing balance and dynamic stability compared with the CG (all p< 0.05). This 12-week exercise program improved fall-related factors in patients with PD. Sensors 2023,23, 1817 7 of 17 Table 2. Cont. Author, Year Type of Study and Participants Characteristics of the Intervention Measured Variables Main Results Gandolfi [33] 2019 RCT 37 participants EG: 19 CG: 18 EG: Active self-correction exercises (with visual feedback (i.e., mirror), with proprioceptive feedback (EMG feed-back), and without any feedback) + trunk stabilization exercises+ functional tasks (i.e., dual-task exercises). CG: joint mobilization, muscle strengthening and stretching, overground gait-training and balance exercises. Duration: 60 min./5 days/week, 4 weeks. Forward trunk flexion severity (degree). UPDRS III, dynamic and static balance (Mini BesTest and using an electronic monoaxial platform), pain falls, and quality of life assessment. The EG reported a significantly greater reduction in forward trunk flexion than the CG from T0 to both T1 (p= 0.003) and T2 (p= 0.004). The improvements in dynamic and static balance were significantly greater for the EG than the CG from T0 to T2 (p= 0.017 and p= 0.004, respectively). The four-week trunk-specific rehabilitation training decreased forward trunk flexion severity and increased postural control. Hubble [34] 2019 RCT 24 participants EG: 13 CG: 11 EG: exercise (trunk strength, endurance, and mobility) and falls prevention education. CG: weekly pack of printed multidisciplinary education materials: health tips about lifestyle (e.g., exercise) and/or condition-related issues (e.g., poor sleep quality). Duration: 90 min./week, 12 weeks. Motor symptom severity (UPDRS-III), balance confidence (portable force plate and ABC Scale), mobility (TUG), quality of life (39-item Parkinson Disease Questionnaire) and quiet-standing balance. No significant changes in clinical outcomes following the intervention. During quiet standing, sway area on a foam surface without vision was reduced for the EG at 12 (p= 0.029) and 24 weeks (p= 0.013). The EG demonstrated reduced sway variability at 12 (p= 0.042) and 24 weeks in the medial–lateral direction (p= 0.043). No changes in quiet standing balance for the CG. Hubble [35] 2018 RCT 24 participants EG: 13 CG: 11 EG: falls prevention education + exercises: trunk mobility exercises to improve ROM; endurance and stability of the trunk muscles (multifidus, erector spinae, obliques, transverse abdominus, rectus abdominus); and stretching and walking in a real-world environment. CG: multidisciplinary falls prevention education. Duration: 90 min./week, 12 weeks. Mobility (TUG), walk (gait analysis, accelerometer), falls (ABC scale), motor symptom severity (UPDRS-III). Statistically significant and clinically relevant improvements in anterior–posterior step-to-step trunk symmetry (p< 0.001) in the EG. CG recorded statistically significant and clinically meaningful reductions in medial–lateral and vertical step-to-step trunk symmetry at 12 weeks (p< 0.001). Paolucci [38] 2017 RCT 36 participants EG: 17 CG: 19 EG: Mezieres method, 3 postures to correct variations in the dorsal curve, perceive the alignment of trunk and promote diaphragmatic breathing. CG: simple home exercise Duration: 1 h, 2 times/week, 5 weeks, 10 sessions. Balance (BBS) gait balance (FGA), mobility (SMWT) and disease-related disability (UPDRS-III). In the Mezieres group, the BBS (p< 0.001) and trunk flexion test (p< 0.001) improved significantly at T1 and remained the same at T2. Between groups, significant changes were reported in FGA (p= 0.027) and UPDRS Total (p= 0.007) at T1 and in FGA (p= 0.03) at T2. The Mezieres approach is effective in improving the flexibility of the trunk and balance. Sensors 2023,23, 1817 8 of 17 Table 2. Cont. Author, Year Type of Study and Participants Characteristics of the Intervention Measured Variables Main Results Capecci [36] 2014 RCT 24 participants EG: 13 CG: 11 EG: 7 participants, proprioceptive and tactile stimulation, combined with stretching and PR. Six participants had PR as well as Kinesio taping strips applied to their trunk muscles, according to the features of their postural abnormalities CG: No intervention. Duration: 40 min./3 times, 4 weeks, 12 sessions. Balance (BBS), mobility (TUG) and degrees of trunk bending in the sagittal and coronal planes. At T1, all treated patients showed a significant improvement in trunk posture in both the sagittal (p= 0.002) and coronal planes (p= 0.01), compared with baseline. Moreover, they showed an improvement in measures of gait and balance (p< 0.01). Benefits persisted at T2 for all measures, except lateral trunk bend. No differences were found when comparing the PR and KT groups. RCT: randomized clinical trial; EG: experimental group; CG: control group; G: group; min.: minutes; COP: centre of pressure; ABC scale: Activity-Specific Balance Confidence Scale; BBS: Berg Balance Scale; Mini Best-Test: Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test; mFEST: modified Falls Efficacy Scale; UPDRS: Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS-III); TUG: Timed Up and Go; FFT: functional fitness test; TMS: trunk mobility scale; ROM: range of movement; FGA: functional gait assessment; PR: postural re-education; KT: Kinesio taping; T0 = baseline assessment; T1 = first assessment; T2 = Second assessment. 3.1. Participant Characteristics The study sample ranged from 23 to 44 participants, with a total of 240 analysed (EG: 123 and CG: 117). As for gender, 163 were men and 91 were women, with an age range between 65 and 77.2. The individuals were diagnosed according to the UK Brain Bank criteria for idiopathic Parkinson’s Disease [ 16 , 32 – 34 ] and/or by clinical diagnosis confirmed by a neurologist using the Hoehn & Yahr scale [14,33,37,38]. 3.2. Variables (Table 3) 3.2.1. Balance Both static and dynamic balance were evaluated in eight of the nine articles included using posturography with strength platforms [ 14 , 16 , 32 – 34 , 37 , 38 ]. Significant changes were found for balance in three of the studies [16,32,34]. As for the measurement using the Mini BesTest (MBT) for dynamic balance, the studies by Cabrera [16], Terrens [37] and Gandolfi [33] obtained significant changes in the EG p< 0.02 ,p= 0.011 and p= 0.017, respectively. In the case of the protocol in Cabrera [ 16 ], the participants took part in interventions focused specifically on central stabilization, finding significant improvements in anticipatory, reactive postural control and dynamic gait subscales. The Halliwick aquatic group improved significantly post-intervention [37] and the EG with active self-correction exercises, proprioceptive feedback and trunk stabilization exercises plus functional tasks [34]. 3.2.2. Mobility Mobility was generally measured using Timed Up and Go (TUG), obtaining conflicting results [ 32 , 34 – 36 ]. The cohort assessed in one study [ 34 ] generally comprised early-stage PD patients who presented with mild to moderate motor symptoms. 3.2.3. Gait Gait was evaluated by different analysis systems, including movement analysis, cameras, platforms and markers attached primarily to the trunk and lower limbs [14,32,34]. Sensors 2023,23, 1817 9 of 17 3.2.4. Falls Falls, balance confidence and self-perception upon falling were assessed using two self-efficacy instruments: the Activity-Specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC Scale) and the modified Falls Efficacy Scale (mFest) [16,34,37]. 3.2.5. Motor Status Motor status was evaluated in all the studies using the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS III) [ 32 – 38 ] or the Movement Disorder Society-UPDRS (MDS-UPDRS III) [ 14 , 16 ]. The MDS-UPDRS is a revision of the UPDRS originally developed in the 1980s. The MDS-UPDRS was developed to evaluate various aspects of Parkinson’s disease including non-motor and motor experiences of daily living and motor complications [ 46 ]. Two articles [34,35] showed no changes in motor status. Table 3. Results of the variables: mobility, gait, balance. Author, Year Mobility/Motor Symptom Gait Static and Dynamic Balance Vasconcellos [14] 2021 Movement Disorders Society—Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale III (MDS-UPDRS-III) observed a reduction of trunk flexion after trunk exercises. No significant time ×group interaction was observed: velocity, hip extension, knee and ankle ROM; with no intragroup differences. This study failed to find any significant changes in the results of the groups that engaged in exercises at home, unsupervised by a physical therapist. Cabrera [ 16 ] 2020 There were no significant differences between groups in MDS-UPDRS-III Scale (p= 0.083). Significant improvements were found in the anticipatory, reactive postural control, and dynamic gait subscales (p< 0.05). The number of falls in the previous month for the EG significantly decreased (p= 0.047). The participants in the EG performed significantly better than those in the CG in the dynamic balance assessment (p= 0.002). The EG had a significant improvement in maximal excursion of COP in forward (p= 0.048), right (p= 0.046) and left (p= 0.010) directions of limits of stability. Terrens [37] 2020 They improved the results in both intervention groups (aquatic and land), without being statistically significant, using the UPDRS-III Scale. They found no significant changes using modified Falls Efficacy Scale. No significant differences with Berg balance scale among the three groups compared (Halliwick aquatic exercises; traditional aquatic and land physiotherapy). Youm [32] 2020 With Timed Up and Go (TUG) significant results were found (p= 0.004) (intergroup). They evaluated the participants with the Functional Fitness Test (FFT), obtaining favorable results in 2-minute step test (p= 0.044). With the sit-to-walk test, they obtained improvements in EG in increased length and speed in the first step phase (p= 0.003, p= 0.006, respectively) and during the second step phase in comparison to the CG (p= 0.020 and p= 0.028, respectively). Significant changes were found for anteroposterior speed (AP) (p= 0.030) and middle lateral (ML) (p= 0.028) of COP trajectory compared with CG Gandolfi [33] 2019 They obtained significant results in both groups before and after the treatment (p= 0.01) but did not find differences between the groups, using the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale III. The number of falls in the previous month for the EG significantly decreased (p= 0.004). Mini BesTest for dynamic balance obtained significant changes in the EG (p= 0.017). Sensors 2023,23, 1817 16 of 17 23. Cole, M.H.; Naughton, G.; Silburn, P.A. Neuromuscular Impairments Are Associated with Impaired Head and Trunk Stability During Gait in Parkinson Fallers. Neurorehabilit. Neural Repair 2017,31, 34–47. [CrossRef] 24. Hirsch, M.A.; Toole, T.; Maitland, C.G.; Rider, R.A. The effects of balance training and high-intensity resistance training on persons with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2003,84, 1109–1117. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 25. Allen, N.E.; Sherrington, C.; Paul, S.S.; Canning, C.G. Balance and falls in Parkinson’s disease: A meta-analysis of the effect of exercise and motor training. Mov. Disord. 2011,26, 1605–1615. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 26. Yitayeh, A.; Teshome, A. The effectiveness of physiotherapy treatment on balance dysfunction and postural instability in persons with Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Sports Sci. Med. Rehabil. 2016 ,8, 17. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 27. Pinto, C.; Salazar, A.P.; Marchese, R.R.; Stein, C.; Pagnussat, A.S. The Effects of Hydrotherapy on Balance, Functional Mobility, Motor Status, and Quality of Life in Patients with Parkinson Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. PMR 2019 ,11, 278–291. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 28. Bissolotti, L.; Rota, M.; Calza, S.; Sanchez Romero, E.A.; Battaglino, A.; Villafañe, J.H. Relationship between Lower Limbs Performance and Spinal Alignment in Parkinson’s Disease Patients: An Observational Study with Cross Sectional Design. J. Clin. Med. 2022,11, 3775. [CrossRef] 29. Renee, S.; Elisabeth, P.; Niruthikha, M.; Allyson, F.; Louise, A. People with mild PD have impaired force production in all lower limb muscle groups: A cross-sectional study. Physiother. Res. Int. 2021,26, e1897. [CrossRef] 30. Gómez-Regueira, N.; Escobar-Velando, G. Tratamiento fisioterapéutico de las alteraciones posturales en la enfermedad de Parkinson. Revisión sistemática. Fisioterapia 2017,39, 33–43. [CrossRef] 31. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009,6, e1000097. [CrossRef] 32. Youm, C.; Kim, Y.; Noh, B.; Lee, M.; Kim, J.; Cheon, S.M. Impact of trunk resistance and stretching exercise on fall-related factors in patients with parkinson’s disease: A randomized controlled pilot study. Sensors 2020,20, 4106. [CrossRef] 33. Gandolfi, M.; Tinazzi, M.; Magrinelli, F.; Busselli, G.; Dimitrova, E.; Polo, N.; Manganotti, P.; Fasano, A.; Smania, N.; Geroin, C. Four-week trunk-specific exercise program decreases forward trunk flexion in Parkinson’s disease: A single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Park. Relat Disord. 2019,64, 268–274. [CrossRef] 34. Hubble, R.P.; Silburn, P.A.; Naughton, G.A.; Cole, M.H. Trunk exercises improve balance in Parkinson disease: A phase II randomized controlled trial. JNPT 2019,43, 96–105. [CrossRef] 35. Hubble, R.P.; Naughton, G.; Silburn, P.A.; Cole, M.H. Trunk Exercises Improve Gait Symmetry in Parkinson Disease: A Blind Phase II Randomized Controlled Trial. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2018,97, 151–159. [CrossRef] 36. Capecci, M.; Serpicelli, C.; Fiorentini, L.; Censi, G.; Ferretti, M.; Orni, C.; Renzi, R.; Provinciali, L.; Ceravolo, M.G. Postural rehabilitation and kinesio taping for axial postural disorders in Parkinson’s disease. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2014 ,95, 1067–1075. [CrossRef] 37. Terrens, A.F.; Soh, S.E.; Morgan, P. The safety and feasibility of a Halliwick style of aquatic physiotherapy for falls and balance dysfunction in people with Parkinson’s Disease: A single blind pilot trial. PLoS ONE 2020,15, e0236391. [CrossRef] 38. Paolucci, T.; Zangrando, F.; Piccinini, G.; Deidda, L.; Basile, R.; Bruno, E.; Buzi, E.; Mannocci, A.; Tirinelli, F.; Haggiag, S.; et al. Impact of Mézières Rehabilitative Method in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Park. Dis. 2017 , 2017, 2762987. [CrossRef] 39. Maher, C.G.; Sherrington, C.; Herbert, R.D.; Moseley, A.M.; Elkins, M. Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys. Ther. 2003,83, 713–721. [CrossRef] 40. Higgins, J.P.T.; Thomas, J.; Chandler, J.; Cumpston, M.; Li, T.; Page, M.J.; Welch, V.A. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 6.3; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2022. 41. Higgins, J.P.T.; Thompson, S.G.; Deeks, J.J.; Altman, D.G. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses Testing for heterogeneity. BMJ 2003,327, 557–560. [CrossRef] 42. Holroyd-Leduc, J.M.; Helewa, A.; Walker, J.M. Critical Evaluation of Research in Physical Rehabilitation: Towards Evidence-Based Practice. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Company, 2000. BMJ Evid. Based Med. 2002,7, 135. [CrossRef] 43. Higgins, J.P.; Thompson, S.G. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat. Med. 2002,21, 1539–1558. [CrossRef] 44. Sedgwick, P. Meta-analyses: What is heterogeneity? BMJ 2015,350, h1435. [CrossRef] 45. Low, D.; Walsh, G.S.; Arkesteijn, M. Effectiveness of Exercise Interventions to Improve Postural Control in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Centre of Pressure Measurements. Sports Med. 2017 ,47, 101–112. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 46. Goetz, C.G.; Tilley, B.C.; Shaftman, S.R.; Stebbins, G.T.; Fahn, S.; Martinez-Martin, P.; Poewe, W.; Sampaio, C.; Stern, M.B.; Dodel, R.; et al. Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS): Scale presentation and clinimetric testing results. Mov. Disord. 2008,23, 2129–2170. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 47. Clark, R.A.; Bryant, A.L.; Pua, Y.; McCrory, P.; Bennell, K.; Hunt, M. Validity and reliability of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board for assessment of standing balance. Gait Posture 2010,31, 307–310. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 48. Fernandes, A.; Coelho, T.; Vitória, A.; Ferreira, A.; Santos, R.; Rocha, N.; Fernandes, L.; Tavares, J.M.R. Standing balance in individuals with Parkinson’s disease during single and dual-task conditions. Gait Posture 2015 ,42, 323–328. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 49. Geroin, C.; Artusi, C.A.; Gandolfi, M.; Zanolin, E.; Ceravolo, R.; Capecci, M.; Andrenelli, E.; Ceravolo, M.G.; Bonanni, L.; Onofrj, M.; et al. Does the Degree of Trunk Bending Predict Patient Disability, Motor Impairment, Falls, and Back Pain in Parkinson’s Disease? Front. Neurol. 2020,11, 207. [CrossRef] [PubMed] Sensors 2023,23, 1817 17 of 17 50. Palmisano, C.; Brandt, G.; Pozzi, N.G.; Leporini, A.; Maltese, V.; Canessa, A.; Volkmann, J.; Pezzoli, G.; Frigo, C.A.; Isaias, I.U. Sit-to-walk performance in Parkinson’s disease: A comparison between faller and non-faller patients. Clin. Biomech. 2019 ,63, 140–146. [CrossRef] 51. Van der Marck, M.; Klok, M.; Okun, M.; Giladi, N.; Munneke, M.; Bloem, B. Consensus-based clinical practice recommendations for the examination and management of falls in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Park. Relat. Disord. 2014 ,20, 360–369. [CrossRef] 52. Jehu, D.; Nantel, J. Fallers with Parkinson’s disease exhibit restrictive trunk control during walking. Gait Posture 2018 ,65, 246–250. [CrossRef] 53. Davidson, B.S.; Madigan, M.L.; Nussbaum, M.A. Effects of lumbar extensor fatigue and fatigue rate on postural sway. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 2004,93, 83–89. [CrossRef] 54. Mactier, K.; Lord, S.; Godfrey, A.; Burn, D.; Rochester, L. The relationship between real world ambulatory activity and falls in incident Parkinson’s disease: Influence of classification scheme. Park. Relat. Disord. 2015,21, 236–242. [CrossRef] 55. Lee, K.; Kim, J.; Kim, H. Back extensor strengthening exercise and backpack wearing treatment for camptocormia in Parkinson’s disease: A retrospective pilot study. Ann. Rehabil. Med. 2017,41, 677–685. [CrossRef] 56. Bestaven, E.; Guillaud, E.; Sèze, M.; Jerome, A.; Burbaud, P.; Cazalets, J.; Guehl, D. Effect of trunk muscle strengthening on gait pattern and falls in parkinson´s disease. J. Rehabil. Med. Clin. Commun. 2019,2, 1000003. [CrossRef] 57. Rafferty, M.R.; Fellow, P.D.; Prodoehl, J.; Robichaud, J.A.; David, F.J.; Vaillancourt, D.E.; Kohrt, W.M.; Comella, C.L.; Corcos, D.M. Effects of Two Years of Exercise on Gait Impairment in People with Parkinson’s Disease: The PRET-PD Randomized Trial. J. Neurol. Phys. Ther. 2017,41, 21–30. [CrossRef] 58. Volpe, D.; Giantin, M.G.; Manuela, P.; Filippetto, C.; Pelosin, E.; Abbruzzese, G.; Antonini, A. Water-based vs. non-water-based physiotherapy for rehabilitation of postural deformities in Parkinson’s disease: A randomized controlled pilot study. Clin. Rehabil. 2017,31, 1107–1115. [CrossRef] 59. Faíl, L.B.; Marinho, D.A.; Marques, E.A.; Costa, M.J.; Santos, C.C.; Marques, M.C.; Izquierdo, M.; Neiva, H.P. Benefits of aquatic exercise in adults with and without chronic disease-A systematic review with meta-analysis. J. Med. Sci. Sports 2022 ,32, 465–486. [CrossRef] 60. Lena, F.; Iezzi, E.; Etoom, M.; Santilli, M.; Centonze, D.; Foti, C.; Grillea, G.; Modugno, N. Effects of postural exercises in patients with Parkinson’s disease and Pisa syndrome: A pilot study. NeuroRehabilitation 2017,41, 423–428. [CrossRef] 61. Hubble, R.P.; Naughton, G.A.; Silburn, P.A.; Cole, M.H. Trunk muscle exercises as a means of improving postural stability in people with Parkinson’s disease: A protocol for a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2014,31, e006095. [CrossRef] 62. Cano-de-la-Cuerda, R.; Vela-Desojo, L.; Moreno-Verdú, M.; Ferreira-Sánchez, M.d.R.; Macías-Macías, Y.; Miangolarra-Page, J.C. Trunk Range of Motion Is Related to Axial Rigidity, Functional Mobility and Quality of Life in Parkinson’s Disease: An Exploratory Study. Sensors 2020,20, 2482. [CrossRef] 63. Lorraine, K.; Anthony, L. Parkinson’s disease. Lancet 2015,386, 896–912. Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.