Can Samba and Forró Brazilian rhythmic dance be more effective than walking in improving functional mobility and spatiotemporal gait parameters in patients with Parkinson’s disease?

Table 6 Mean values and standard error (SE) variables of spatiotemporal gait parameters in the SSS in the DG and WG groups at the PRE and POST intervention moments; and the difference (p) regarding group, time and group*time interaction, Effect Size and Confidence Interval (IC)

Variables	Intervention	PRÉ		PÓST		p – valor			Effect Size [CI]
Variables	Intervention	Mean ± SE		Mean ± SE		Group	Time	Group*Time	Effect Size [CI]
Velocity (m/s)	DG	1.02	0.05	1.10	0.07	0.762	0.960	0.960	0.09 [−0.89 to 1.07]
Velocity (m/s)	WG	1.08	0.06	1.08	0.06	0.762	0.960	0.960	0.09 [−0.89 to 1.07]
SF (steps/min)	DG	111.48^#	3.05	118.50^#	3.63	0.196	0.009*	0.011**	0.72 [−0.34 to 1.67]
SF (steps/min)	WG	110.00	2.46	110.10	2.05	0.196	0.009*	0.011**	0.72 [−0.34 to 1.67]
SL (m)	DG	0.54	0.02	0.57	0.03	0.380	0.052	0.129	0.25 [−0.90 to 1.37]
SL (m)	WG	0.59	0.02	0.59	0.02	0.380	0.052	0.129	0.25 [−0.90 to 1.37]
StT (s)	DG	0.73	0.02	0.69	0.03	0.869	0.215	0.074	0.35 [−0.82 to 1.46]
StT (s)	WG	0.71	0.02	0.72	0.03	0.869	0.215	0.074	0.35 [−0.82 to 1.46]
SwT (s)	DG	0.36	0.009	0.34	0.007	0.011*	0.054	0.144	1.50 [0.30 to 2.46]
SwT (s)	WG	0.38	0.008	0.37	0.01	0.011*	0.054	0.144	1.50 [0.30 to 2.46]
DSP (%)	DG	17.10	0.80	16.69	1.00	0.061	0.502	0.891	0.68 [−0.37 to 1.63]
DSP (%)	WG	14.83	0.80	14.60	0.80	0.061	0.502	0.891	0.68 [−0.37 to 1.63]

Note: SF step frequency, SL step length, StT stance time, SwT swing time and DSP double support phase
*indicates statistically significant difference (p < 0.05); **indicates group*time interaction, ^#indicates where is the difference found in group*time interaction after Bonferroni post hoc application

ISSN: 1471-2377