LAUSR

PURPOSE Differences between standard dysarthria treatment and the same treatment with the integration of neurodynamic techniques tailored to the severity of dysarthria in patients with Parkinson's disease were examined. METHOD In total, 10 subjects with idiopathic Parkinson's disease and rigid-hypokinetic dysarthria were enrolled in this quasi-randomized, controlled, single-blind, pre-post study. In each of 12 therapy sessions the control group (n = 5) received standard dysarthria treatment (usual care), while the intervention group (n = 5) received the same treatment with the addition of integrated neurodynamic treatment (special care). RESULTS There was no significant difference between the two groups for either the pre-test (p = 0.739) or the post-test (p = 0.156) results. However, significant differences between the pre-test and post-test results within each group (intervention group p = 0.001; control group p = 0.003) were found. CONCLUSIONS The significant differences in the pre-post comparison within the groups may indicate a high probability of a positive effect of standard dysarthria treatment on the severity of dysarthria. In between-group comparisons, the study results indicated no evidence of a significant difference between standard dysarthria treatment with or without neurodynamics. Due to the small sample size, the effectiveness of the integration of neurodynamics into speech therapy cannot be definitively concluded for now. In order to be able to have generalized applicability, future studies with larger numbers of participants are required.