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 7 Mean values and standard error (SE) variables of spatiotemporal gait parameters in the FS 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	1.43	0.10	1.48	0.07	0.477	0.464	0.464	0.23 [−0.77 to 1.20]
Velocity (m/s)	WG	1.53	0.08	1.53	0.06	0.477	0.464	0.464	0.23 [−0.77 to 1.20]
SF (steps/min)	DG	136.05	5.70	142.23	4.30	0.544	0.563	0.114	0.62 [−0.43 to 1.57]
SF (steps/min)	WG	137.10	4.70	134.30	2.50	0.544	0.563	0.114	0.62 [−0.43 to 1.57]
SL (m)	DG	0.64	0.04	0.63	0.03	0.379	0.295	0.110	0.76 [−0.30 to 1.71]
SL (m)	WG	0.66	0.03	0.70	0.03	0.379	0.295	0.110	0.76 [−0.30 to 1.71]
StT (s)	DG	0.60	0.03	0.55	0.02	0.940	0.009*	0.250	0.16 [−0.84 to 1.12]
StT (s)	WG	0.58	0.03	0.56	0.02	0.940	0.009*	0.250	0.16 [−0.84 to 1.12]
SwT (s)	DG	0.32^#	0.01	0.30^#	0.01	0.544	0.814	< 0.001**	1.10 [−0.02 to 2.05]
SwT (s)	WG	0.31^#	0.01	0.33^#	0.01	0.544	0.814	< 0.001**	1.10 [−0.02 to 2.05]
DSP (%)	DG	14.78	1.00	13.75	0.80	0.790	< 0.001*	0.113	0.39 [−0.63 to 1.34]
DSP (%)	WG	15.22	1.20	12.72	1.00	0.790	< 0.001*	0.113	0.39 [−0.63 to 1.34]

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