Abstract
Similarities in the clinical presentation of the various types of muscular dystrophy allow the use of common principles of clinical management and intervention to provide optimal comprehensive care with the coordinated expertise of a multidisciplinary team. Anticipatory physical therapy (PT) management is based upon an understanding of the pathokinesiology of each type of MD, an understanding of the progression of the pathokinesiology overtime, individual evaluation within the context of each individual’s life and goals, and provision of consistent, preventative management across the lifespan in order to minimize the clinical and functional impact of the diagnosis and to optimize quality of life. We are now entering an exciting new era, in which the natural histories of neuromuscular disorders are changing and improving based on improved medical care and management, and in which actual disease modifying treatments are emerging. PT management may for the first time contribute to improvement and recovery in individuals with muscle diseases, in addition to using prospective anticipatory care to manage impairments and optimize function and participation. In this new era, it will remain important to understand and continue to use optimal principles of intervention in comprehensive, anticipatory, preventative management and to optimize the benefits of disease modifying treatments as they emerge.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
- Clinical presentation
- Clinical management
- Physical therapy
- Pathokinesiology
- Assessment tools
- Orthotic intervention
- Adaptive equipment
- Assistive technology
- Pain control
Introduction
Muscular dystrophies (MDs) are a group of genetically based neuromuscular disorders characterized by disease-specific patterns of progressive muscle weakness accompanied by postural compensations and the risk of progressive contracture, deformity, and compromised function which may be accompanied by involvement across numerous body systems [1–14]. Individual MDs differ in the genetic basis, the cause and site of pathology, specific clinical features, distribution and extent of involvement, natural history, and prognosis [15–18], the details of which have been covered in previous chapters.
Similarities in the clinical presentation of MDs have allowed the use of common principles of clinical management and intervention in the provision of optimal comprehensive care with the coordinated expertise of a multidisciplinary team [5, 6, 19, 20]. Comprehensive, anticipatory physical therapy (PT) management of MD is based upon an understanding of the pathokinesiology of each type of MD, an understanding of the progression of the pathokinesiology over time, individual evaluation within the context of each individual’s life and goals, and provision of consistent, preventative management across the lifespan in order to minimize the clinical and functional impact of the diagnosis and to optimize quality of life [1–3, 5, 6, 11, 19–24].
Historically, physical therapists have worked with individuals with MDs to minimize the clinical impact of the cellular pathology, to prevent secondary complications, to promote and maintain the maximum level of function and functional independence, and to achieve and maintain the highest possible quality of life for all individuals in spite of the disease process and/or progression [6, 25–28].
We are now entering an exciting new era, in which the natural histories of neuromuscular disorders are changing and improving based on improved medical care and management, and in which actual disease modifying treatments are emerging (see Chapter 4). PT management may increasingly, and for the first time, have the opportunity to assist in contributing to improvement and recovery in individuals with muscle diseases in addition to using prospective anticipatory care to manage impairments and optimize function and participation. In this new era, it will remain important to understand and continue to use optimal principles of intervention in comprehensive, anticipatory, preventative management and to optimize the benefits of disease modifying treatments as they emerge.
Pathokinesiology
The underlying genetic basis and cellular pathology that characterize specific MDs differ, but each is typically characterized by a unique and genetically based progressive degeneration of muscle often accompanied by fibrosis and fatty infiltration that contributes to the development of contracture and deformity [29] (see Chapters 3–5). A self-perpetuating cycle of events in MDs has been described [14], in which imbalanced muscle weakness, compensatory movement patterns and postural habits, and the influence of gravity interact in the progression of disability [1, 2, 11, 14, 19, 30–32]. Weakness often progresses proximal to distal and is often first evident in muscles around the shoulder, trunk, and pelvic girdles, with patterns of muscle involvement specific and unique to each type of MD [1, 13, 15–18, 31, 33, 34]. As weakness increases, compensatory alterations are made in posture and movement to mechanically lock joints and substitute for lack of adequate muscle strength [11, 14, 19, 30, 31, 35]. The substitutions are effective in maximizing function but eventually lead to contracture and deformity that contribute to increasing weakness and disability [36, 37]. In addition to weakness that occurs due to actual muscle degeneration, weakness may also seem to “progress” in proportion to growth, as has also been described in other disorders characterized by weakness [38, 39]. The compromising impact and effect of gravity increases in magnitude with increased size as the muscles are less able to cope with an increase in mass, and during periods of rapid growth in which contracture can progress more rapidly.
Effective intervention is that which is focused on breaking this self-perpetuating cycle of events whenever possible so that strength can be maximally maintained, contracture and deformity can be minimized, and compensations can be used to maximize function without leading to increases in disability [14, 19].
The key to management of most neuromuscular diseases is in their predictability [1]. Muscle weakness progresses in specific and well-known orders and patterns [1, 13, 30, 31, 40–43]. Predictable compensations are used to cope with this increasing weakness [1, 33, 34, 44–46]. Specific muscle tightness, contracture, and deformity can result and occurs in predictable sequences without intervention [5, 6, 36, 40, 46] (Table 8.1). This predictability is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, the predictability is evidence of a progression that cannot yet be stopped. On the other hand, knowledge of the predictable progression empowers the multidisciplinary team, and the family, to plan ahead and intervene with prospective, preventative, anticipatory management. Many of the devastating secondary effects of the intrinsic myopathic process can be minimized with comprehensive, ongoing, anticipatory, and preventative management that maintains the highest possible quality of life despite disease progression [6, 55]. Multidisciplinary guidelines supporting this approach are available for increasing numbers of neuromuscular disorders [5, 6, 56, 57].
Physical Therapy Assessment
Assessment must be ongoing and comprehensive so that intervention can be timely and anticipatory [6, 37]. Specific areas of weakness, tightness, and compensation should be identified in order to allow intervention that optimizes and protects muscle integrity and function, prevents contracture and deformity, and provides for effective adaptive functioning and participation to the greatest extent possible [6]. Assessment and intervention should occur across the ICF (the World Health Organization International Classification of Function [58]) and across the lifespan [5, 6, 55, 59] and should include impairment level measures, functional measures, and measures of participation, while considering the context and environmental factors of the individual [60]. Assessment and management of musculoskeletal and cardiorespiratory involvement and function requires a multidisciplinary team [5, 6] (Table8.2).
Physical Therapy Intervention
Prevention of Contracture and Deformity
With weakness and compensation there may be no way to eliminate a compensatory pattern of movement without eliminating the function it serves, but it is important to try to find compensations that pose less of a risk of contracture and deformity and to try to avoid development of the contractures that contribute to the self-perpetuating evolution of weakness/contracture/functional loss [6, 14, 30, 31, 35]. The effects of chronic positioning, the unopposed influence of gravity, and imbalanced muscle activity around joints contribute to the development of hypoextensibility (tightness) and contracture [2, 6, 11, 30, 35, 119]. Positioning for function and for management of the musculoskeletal system should be offered [6, 21, 23, 120–122].
Stretching: Prevention/minimization of contracture requires sufficient daily elongation of musculature and daily movement through more complete ranges of motion than the individual with MD typically uses actively and independently [1, 2, 6, 11, 21, 36, 44, 45, 119, 123]; these may be achieved through preventative stretching and varied positioning, facilitation of movement and position changes, use of therapeutic interventions including passive and active elongation, daily range of motion/stretching, the appropriate use of orthotic intervention, splinting, serial casting, power positioning components on mobility devices, participation in aquatics and cycling/assisted cycling and other forms of submaximal active movement and participation, and the use of adaptive equipment for positioning and prolonged passive elongation including the use of standers and stand-and-drive mobility devices [5, 6, 11, 19, 21, 23, 24, 37, 44, 45, 55, 119, 123–127]. A stretching program should begin early in the course of the disease and is more effective and more easily established as part of the daily routine if it is begun before muscle tightness/contracture is established and before stretching is uncomfortable. A preventative stretching program should address structures known to be at risk for tightness based on natural history of the specific diagnosis, as well as any structures identified by individual assessment to be at risk for contracture [6]. Direct and skilled physical therapy techniques of muscle elongation, joint mobilization, gentle manual traction, and use of modalities and other manual therapy techniques to increase joint mobility and muscle elongation should be included as appropriate for individual patients based on recommendations after individual physical therapy evaluation [128] (Table 8.3).
Orthotic intervention/adaptive equipment: Orthotic intervention may be recommended for function and/or for assistance in management of the musculoskeletal system and may include consideration of many different choices, configurations, and materials, for upper and lower extremities, trunk, and neck. Lower extremity orthotic intervention may include consideration of ankle–foot orthoses (AFOs or “short leg orthoses”), knee–ankle–foot orthoses (KAFOs or “long leg braces”), knee extension splints, inframalleolar orthoses (“foot orthoses”), or other types and configurations of orthoses, with control of varying degrees of freedom depending on specific diagnosis and individual assessment [6, 21, 23, 123, 129]. Upper extremity splinting, orthotic intervention, and support may include splinting for stretching or support of function [130] and is increasingly including exploration of exoskeletons and robotics to increase functional use of hands in the presence of proximal weakness [131, 132].
Use of lower extremity orthotic intervention and adaptive equipment for function during walking typically depends upon the distribution of weakness and the required use of compensatory patterns of movement for function. In the presence of relatively greater proximal weakness in individuals who are independently ambulatory, such as in Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), the use of AFOs during walking is not typically recommended. This is because AFOs tend to compromise ambulation by limiting the use of compensations needed for walking, such as toe-walking or intermittent toe-walking, may compromise proximal compensations needed to keep the line of gravity behind the hip and in front of the knee to maintain ambulation, and may make it more difficult to get up from the floor, with the added weight of AFOs further compromising function [6, 129]. In other types of MD characterized by relatively greater distal than proximal weakness, or in which more global weakness is present, such as in some types of congenital myopathy, AFOs may assist in providing distal stability. This can be beneficial during standing and/or ambulation as long as AFOs are lightweight enough and offer optimal support without unnecessarily compromising function or movement that is necessary for function. Newer, ultra-lightweight carbon fiber AFOs used in conjunction with lower profile orthotic intervention at the foot and ankle may offer lightweight support without compromising function in those with greater distal than proximal weakness. This can potentially offer dorsiflexion assist during swing to prevent “foot drop” and “steppage gait” and potentially provide some floor-reaction support of knee extension during stance and may decrease fatigue. Ankle height or supramalleolar orthoses (SMOs) are not typically helpful because they add weight that challenges active dorsiflexion (typically weak in MDs) without adding dorsiflexion assist. However, these could be considered in the rare situation in which weakness is extremely mild, with good strength in anterior tibialis, but with poor medial–lateral alignment that requires more support than an inframalleolar orthosis. KAFOs may be useful in children with greater weakness throughout lower extremities in the absence of the ability to support weight-bearing independently. This approach has been shown to extend walking for several years in some individuals with DMD when independent walking becomes too difficult because of inability to support weight through lower extremities without support and/or inability to maintain biomechanical positioning to mechanically lock joints in support of weight-bearing and ambulation [46, 55, 121, 133–136]. Braced ambulation with KAFOs may be therapeutic rather than functional across settings [46] and is most often used in combination with motorized mobility for functional, safe, independent mobility in settings in which braced ambulation is not functional or does not allow optimal participation.
Use of lower extremity orthotic intervention and adaptive equipment for musculoskeletal management (to prevent contracture and deformity) may include the use of AFOs [6, 21, 123], KAFOs [23, 55, 133], thigh binders, splints, serial casting [126, 127], or other positioning devices at night [21] or in the evening or during any portions of the day when they will not unduly interfere with function [6]. The use of AFOs at night has been shown to minimize the progression of plantarflexion contractures [21] and is recommended if tolerated. AFOs used at night need to be comfortable and should be custom molded and lightweight enough not to unduly restrict bed mobility. A bed or foot tent can hold the blanket up off of the feet to avoid the feet getting tangled in the sheets. Adjustable angle orthoses can sometimes be used to provide differing amounts of stretch at different times of the day, or gradually increasing elongation for comfort. The use of ankle height or SMOs may be helpful for those using a wheelchair full time, in order to assist in maintaining optimal medial–lateral alignment if the footplate of the chair can be successfully used to limit excessive plantarflexion. The number of hours per day that a muscle is in a lengthened vs. shortened position will influence the development or prevention of contracture. Standard recommendations for prevention of progressive contracture support the maintenance of a lengthened position for six of every 24 h [137]. The use of standers and stand-and-drive motorized mobility devices is recommended for providing prolonged passive elongation into simultaneous hip and knee extension in an upright weight-bearing for optimizing and maintaining joint range of motion, providing muscle elongation over multiple joints, and optimizing bone integrity, if tolerated [20, 55, 133, 134, 138, 139].
Prevention/minimization of spinal deformity typically involves: promotion of symmetry through the vertebral column and pelvis; support of appropriate amounts of extension and flexion at specific levels of the vertebral column; maintenance of flexibility; support of optimal posture; and minimization of the asymmetrical deforming forces of compensatory patterns of movements used for function (in most neuromuscular disorders) or intrinsic to diagnosis (such as in FSH). The progression of spinal deformity in neuromuscular disorders has been well studied, and understanding of the individual pathokinesiology in each diagnosis and detailed assessment and management of the interaction between components in each individual are critical. The development and progression of scoliosis has been most extensively studied in DMD, which can be used as a model to understand the pathokinesiology, and can inform conservative treatment. The natural history of scoliosis is changing with the use of steroids in DMD, with scoliosis appearing later, and with less devastating progression [140].
Scoliosis in ambulatory individuals with DMD has been studied [141, 142] and is characterized by a flexible, functional scoliosis related to asymmetrical lower extremity position/contracture, pelvic obliquity, asymmetrical realignment of shoulders, head, and upper extremities [35, 143, 144]. Fixed spinal asymmetry is typically minimized spontaneously in ambulatory individuals by prolonged, protective spinal hyperextension and locking of posterior intervertebral facet joints at lumbar and lumbosacral levels, and alternating torso shift and lateral trunk elongation [11, 35, 145].
Historically, prolongation of ambulation by management of lower extremity contracture and the use of long leg braces appeared to slow the development of scoliosis in some [146], likely via prolongation of protective spinal hyperextension maybe through the adolescent growth spurt, and continued torso shift and lateral trunk elongation over symmetrical lower extremities [35, 145, 147, 148]. Factors that have appeared to influence whether or not scoliosis appears prior to final loss of ambulation included: the age at which walking ceases; intervention used or not used to prolong ambulation; and final gait pattern [146].
It has generally been agreed that spinal curves during the ambulatory period are not usually “fixed” (i.e., rigid or inflexible), are functionally necessary for ambulation, and cannot be corrected without risking the loss of ambulation [35]. Attempts should be made, therefore, to minimize long-term effects of asymmetry with stretching, positioning, etc., while allowing compensations necessary for function. In individuals with intrinsic asymmetry of weakness, as has been identified in FSH, and extreme anterior pelvic tilt and lumbar lordosis, the use of a soft corset during ambulation may provide support that decreases pain and fatigue during ambulation without compromising compensations to the extent that ambulation is compromised.
Scoliosis in non-ambulatory individuals: Scoliosis as a significant problem in DMD and other neuromuscular disorders typically either begins or develops more rapidly as ambulation is lost and full time use of a wheelchair begins [35, 149]. It is one of the most serious and disabling complications of many neuromuscular disorders and has been studied extensively in DMD, with the understanding of the principles of progression and treatment gained in DMD useful in the management of all neuromuscular scoliosis [150]. Neuromuscular scoliosis can progress to a level of incapacitating severity that compromises pulmonary function, sitting ability, upper extremity function, comfort, and cosmetic integrity [11, 35]. The progression of scoliosis is variable, however, and final deformity ranges from mild in some individuals to severe in others [150]. The significance of the variability is in the opportunity it offers for effecting change and for making use of intervention that may prevent or minimize the development of scoliosis. Attempts at successful management must be based on a comprehensive understanding of the factors that contribute to the development of scoliosis. Aggressive conservative management must be coordinated with consideration of surgical options in order to prevent the catastrophic progression to severe deformity in all individuals with MDs.
Factors that contribute to the development of scoliosis can be divided into those factors that make the spine vulnerable and those factors that initiate asymmetry [151].
Factors That Make the Spine Vulnerable [ 151 ]:
-
Severe symmetrical weakness in trunk musculature [150, 152]
-
Decreases spinal support and stability.
-
Without external support, the spine is vulnerable to external forces it cannot oppose.
-
-
Rapid vertebral growth during adolescent growth spurt [152, 153]
-
Often coincides with, or follows, the loss of ambulation.
-
Increases vulnerability to potentially deforming forces (the musculoskeletal system is known to be more vulnerable to any deforming force during periods of rapid growth).
-
-
Loss of protective spinal hyperextension [11, 19, 154, 155]
-
Spinal hyperextension is decreased or eliminated when individuals begin to sit full time [156].
-
Posterior intervertebral facet joints are unlocked and allow more lateral flexion (bending) and rotation [19, 150, 156].
-
Stretching of posterior spinal ligaments increases with kyphosis [150].
-
Can be exacerbated by posterior pelvic tilt caused by tight hamstrings and lower extremity alignment in sitting.
-
Asymmetrical forces imposed on the symmetrically weak and vulnerable spine [151]:
-
Compensatory movement patterns used:
-
For stability—Tend to lean on one arm of the wheelchair, may lean forward also—tends to push that shoulder up.
-
For upper extremity (UE) function—Use lateral trunk flexion towards the contralateral (opposite) side when elevating or abducting one upper extremity, in order to substitute for weak shoulder muscles, with persistent leaning towards the non-dominant side, may contribute to development of a curve with convexity towards the side of dominance [152, 157].
-
-
Pelvic position:
-
Posterior pelvic tilt [11, 150]
-
Can further exacerbate an asymmetrical loss of spinal hyperextension by asymmetrically tightness in hamstrings [150]
-
-
Pelvic rotation (in horizontal plane) [150]
-
Pelvic rotation and obliquity can be present in sitting from:
-
-
Hips can have a direct effect on pelvis, then spine, as described above:
-
Asymmetrical hip flexor and/or iliotibial band tightness or contracture
-
Tight hamstrings leading to posterior pelvic tilt and kyphosis
-
-
Foot/ankle asymmetrical contracture into equinovarus from unopposed posterior tibialis and gastrocsoleus—tighter side pushes pelvis back into ipsilateral posterior horizontal pelvic rotation.
-
The deforming force of gravity on the vertebral column increases in the presence of asymmetrical spinal-pelvic alignment that compromises the simple mechanical ability of the vertebral column to withstand the force of gravity. In addition, the resultant unequal distribution of weight on epiphyseal growth plates increases the potential for an initial flexible scoliosis to become structural.
Interaction Between Factors
-
Symmetrically weak and vulnerable spine is present in all individuals with DMD when ambulation ceases.
-
Particular vulnerability is present in those who lose protective spinal hyperextension. This is the initiating factor that is imposed upon the spine with the potential to cause asymmetry and progressive scoliosis. It may include any one of previously described factors and may be different in each person.
-
Once asymmetry is initiated, secondary asymmetries are established and spinal deformities can progress in a self-perpetuating circle of weakness, compensation, and contracture.
Management of the spine must be anticipatory and preventative with consideration across the continuum of intervention options, including stretching, positioning, external support, and surgical options, with coordination between the multidisciplinary team. The use and timing of anticipatory and preventative conservative measures is coordinated with ongoing assessment regarding the potential need for surgical stabilization to manage curves that progress in spite of conservative measures. Care must be taken to coordinate with the rest of the team, with particular coordination between PT, orthopedics, pulmonary medicine, and cardiology, as conservative measures are employed. This helps ensure that the window of opportunity for surgical spinal stabilization (which is dependent on the interaction between pulmonary, respiratory, and cardiology status) is not missed, if the individual will need surgical stabilization at some point (see Chapter 9).
Intervention described in the literature has included prolongation of ambulation, external support including bracing, specialized seating systems, wheelchair modifications, promotion of upper extremity symmetry, control of lower extremity position, and spinal surgery. Bracing of the spine in individuals with DMD has historically not been tolerated or successful but may have a role in other diagnoses and situations, especially in younger children with myopathies characterized by more profound trunk weakness at earlier ages. Orthotic intervention may include supportive garments, corsets, or spine jackets in younger children with some types of MD in order to support more vertical, symmetrical, and extended spinal alignment and more stable posture and stability in upright. Such interventions may assist in maintaining spinal symmetry, or providing some support which may be beneficial in ambulatory individuals in whom some support is helpful but must avoid excessive restriction of movement that may limit compensatory movement required for ambulation [158–160].
Optimal support and positioning in seating systems is critical in musculoskeletal management of the spine and extremities and must include maintenance of midline, symmetrical pelvic position with prevention of lateral pelvic tilt, horizontal pelvic rotation, and excessive anterior or posterior pelvic tilt; maintenance of a midline erect spine, and support of a symmetrical midline head position. Typical recommendations include: a solid seat and back; rigid lateral trunk supports; hip guides; adductors; a head rest and adequate upper extremity and foot and leg support; with power positioning components for power tilt, power recline, separately elevating power elevating leg rests, power adjustable seat height, and power standing [6]. Seating system components are needed for support for function, prevention of progressive contracture and deformity, and maintenance of skin integrity. Power positioning components are needed for function, for independent position change for prevention of contracture and deformity, for support of adequate frequency and duration of weight-bearing throughout the day, and for provision of independent weight shift and pressure relief throughout the day that is adequate to maintain skin integrity.
Physical therapy management of the spine in the individual with MD must involve ongoing evaluation and intervention. Ongoing evaluation must attend to the asymmetrical forces acting on the vulnerable spine and should include assessment of:
-
Pelvic position
-
Spinal alignment including
-
Medial–lateral alignment
-
Rotational tendencies
-
Amount of extension
-
Symmetry vs. asymmetry
-
-
Lower extremity position and its effect on the spine
-
Compensatory movement patterns and positioning
Goals of PT Management of the Spine
-
Maintain ambulation and standing as long as possible
-
Promote spinal extension in sitting except in diagnoses or situations characterized by excessive extension, such as EDMD or in rigid spine syndromes [145]
-
Maintain maximal symmetry of positioning in wheelchair
-
Limit use of compensatory movement patterns that lead to deformity
-
Provide for UE function with symmetry
-
Maintain flexibility
Suggestions for Wheelchair Management
-
Wheelchair support/positioning—the individual’s chair should fit well and provide support that achieves:
-
Sitting position characterized by:
-
A level pelvis without obliquity or rotation
-
A straight, erect, midline spinal position
-
Elimination of kyphosis and encouragement of extension except in diagnoses or situations characterized by excessive extension, such as EDMD or in rigid spine syndromes
-
Symmetrical LE position with good foot placement (not too much plantarvarus) and without hip abduction
-
-
Sufficient trunk support so that asymmetrical leaning is not necessary for maintenance of an upright position
-
Control of asymmetrical movement patterns
-
Specific recommendations for wheelchair seating system components include:
-
Solid seat attached to frame of chair
-
Solid back attached to frame of chair
-
Pelvic control in all planes:
-
Hip control blocks (hip guides)
-
Seat belt appropriately located and/or adapted
-
subASIS bar?
-
-
Knee pads to control abduction (adductor pads)
-
Planar, rigid, lateral trunk supports—appropriately located and strong enough to:
-
Prevent the need to lean laterally for stability
-
Stop compensatory lean for UE function
-
-
Control of lower extremity position—might include:
-
Foot plate appropriately located and angled
-
Ankle straps
-
Padded footrests or foot cradles
-
AFO’s
-
Surgical correction of ankle–foot deformity
-
-
Arm rests appropriately located to encourage spinal extension rather than kyphosis
-
Chest strap (in older individual) in order to provide additional support that centers trunk and allows leaning into lordosis [161]
-
Lumbar roll as appropriate to encourage spinal extension
-
Head support (customized as needed)
-
-
Power tilt-in-space, power recline, with separately elevating power elevating leg rests, for
-
Changes in position, maintenance of skin integrity
-
Opening up of hip and knee angles to assist in minimizing the development of contractures
-
-
Power standing
-
Power seat elevation (power adjustable seat height)
Control of Asymmetrical Compensatory Movement Patterns
-
Evaluate during all functional activities (wheelchair driving or propulsion, writing, eating)
-
Stop compensatory lean!
-
Provide for function with symmetry—might include:
-
Relocation of wheelchair controls (joystick)
-
Closer to hand on wheelchair arm to prevent need for reaching
-
Use of non-dominant hand?
-
Alternate sides periodically?
-
Central location? (but this can compromise stability and increase need for leaning)
-
-
-
Raised desk/tray/table height—works very well to allow pivoting of arm on elbow
-
Overhead sling
-
Balanced forearm orthoses
-
Robotic/exoskeleton forearm support
-
Other adaptive equipment
-
Standing—to assist in control of LE contracture and to encourage spinal extension as well as offering more general physiological benefits and increased function
-
Maintaining flexibility
-
Elongation in prone, supine, or sidelying to maintain symmetrical lateral elongation and flexibility
-
Maximally preventing contractures in lower extremities
-
-
Parent/child education
-
Educate individual and caretakers about symmetry vs. asymmetry and goals of spinal management as described above
-
Have individual monitor symmetry vs. asymmetry with visual feedback at mirror periodically, and when making changes in support or positioning to establish accurate “feel” of symmetry
-
It is important to stop and consciously reassess postural alignment at regular intervals—even as frequently every three months in addition to daily awareness.
The above spinal management plan outlines conservative measures that can be used in an attempt to prevent the progression of scoliosis in individuals with DMD. Close coordination with the rest of the medical team is important in identification of those individuals in whom conservative measures are not working so that more aggressive means, such as surgery, can be used for spinal management.
Spinal surgery is discussed in detail elsewhere (see Chapter 9).
Optimizing strength
Concern about whether or not strengthening activities hasten the progression of weakness in dystrophic muscles are longstanding and exist for many reasons, yet precise knowledge regarding what types of muscle activity may be detrimental or beneficial is limited [22, 172–187]. A certain amount of muscle activity has been assumed to be beneficial in preventing disuse atrophy, maintaining residual strength, providing or maintaining a potential trophic influence of active movement on muscle, and maintaining functional status and flexibility [174, 182, 183, 187]. Overwork weakness, however, should be avoided, as should exercise-induced damage [182, 183]. Eccentric muscle activity and maximal resistive exercise are believed to be detrimental to fragile muscles and should be avoided [183]. Submaximal aerobic exercise within the limits of pain and fatigue is generally supported, balanced by the use of energy conservation techniques for support of function and participation [174, 182, 183, 187] with respiratory muscle training supported by some with similar caution about overexertion [167, 188–192].
Managing/minimizing pain
This often involves assessment and correction of posture; assessment and correction of abnormal or excessive pressure imposed by abnormal posture, immobility, and abnormal weight-bearing with decreased ability to change positions; muscle tightness and/or over-lengthening, imbalanced muscle activity, and functional compensations; patterns and presence of overuse; fatigue; with consideration of other factors such as fracture and cardiac etiology important in settings of acute, new onset, or changing pain [193]. The use of energy conservation techniques and analysis of ergonomics during function are important in prevention and reduction of pain, as is the provision of appropriate adaptive equipment to support function, movement, position change, and pressure relieving surfaces for sitting and sleeping. More direct treatment for relief of pain should be coordinated by the multidisciplinary team and may include PT interventions using modalities of heat, cold, TENS, and massage [47].
Respiratory Management [162–164]
-
Comprehensive evaluation and management by pulmonary medicine specialists is recommended [162, 163, 165, 166]
-
Respiratory function can be compromised by a number of factors:
-
Progressive muscle weakness interacts with spinal/thoracic deformity to result in severe decline in pulmonary function.
-
Intrinsic lung disease is not typically present.
-
Involvement typically includes:
-
-
Less effective breathing due to muscle weakness
-
Weakness may present and progress in respiratory muscles including diaphragm, intercostal muscles, abdominal muscles, and accessory muscles of respiration such as neck flexors, depending on the specific diagnosis.
-
A diaphragmatic pattern of breathing may be used with very little intercostal activity. This restricted pattern of breathing and increasing muscle weakness leads to an inability to expand and compress the lungs fully.
-
Total lung capacity, vital capacity, and forced inspiratory and expiratory abilities decrease and residual volume increases.
-
Progression:
-
Shallow breathing
-
↓
-
More rapid breathing (to get rid of CO2)
-
↓
-
Less chest or lung volume/expansion
-
↓
-
Decreased breathing volume
-
-
-
Decreased lung expansion: leads to little areas of collapse of lung tissue (i.e., atelectasis vulnerable to infection).
-
Decreased coughing ability: due to weakness in abdominals and muscles of forced expiration as well as decreased ability to take a deep breath just before coughing. This leads to retention of secretions.
-
Restricted thoracic mobility and stiffening of the chest wall result from fibrous replacement of the muscles of the thoracic wall as well as from restricted patterns of breathing and decreased lung movement. This leads to further decrease in lung mobility and expansion. It may be accompanied by ankylosing of the joints.
-
Impact of spinal deformity on respiratory status: Respiratory insufficiency compounded by scoliosis when present.
-
Goals of interventions:
-
Maintain chest wall mobility
-
Maintain strength and endurance in respiratory muscles as much as possible, possibly with submaximal exercise, especially when young (and also by providing them with sufficient rest with non-invasive ventilation as needed) [167].
-
Establish and maintain most efficient breathing pattern possible
-
Establish good pulmonary hygiene
-
Coordinate with pulmonary team
-
Support appropriate use of noninvasive inspiratory and expiratory aids
-
-
Suggestions:
-
Inspiratory exercises/segmental breathing
-
To strengthen diaphragm gently, as appropriate, depending on diagnosis
-
For lung expansion and chest wall mobility
-
For more efficient breathing
-
-
Swimming
-
Breath control
-
Breathing patterns
-
Endurance
-
-
Practice coughing and use of mechanical assistance (manual assistance, ambu-bag)
-
GPB—glossopharyngeal breathing
-
Airway clearance techniques with postural drainage as necessary, with use of percussion or oscillatory vest
-
Periodic review of pulmonary hygiene techniques for at home
-
Spinal program to attempt to avoid potential further compromise of respiratory system by scoliosis
-
Inspiratory muscle aids: for example, nocturnal or daytime non-invasive ventilatory support
-
Expiratory muscle aids: for example, mechanical insufflation–exsufflation (MIE)—Cough Assist™
-
Coordination with team for anticipatory management regarding potential tracheostomy if necessary.
-
Cardiac [168]
Cardiac muscle can be affected by the dystrophic process and anticipatory, preventative, comprehensive evaluation and management by cardiology is recommended [168–171]. Myocardial fibrosis may occur, primarily involving the free wall of the left ventricle. Cardiac involvement may also be affected by respiratory status and by scoliosis that, if severe, can cause direct cardiac compression. Cardiac involvement is frequently progressive and may be eventually characterized by the ECG abnormalities, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and dilated cardiomyopathy [171].
Cardiac involvement across the spectrum of MDs may also include AV block, atrial paralysis, atrial fibrillation or flutter, ventricular arrhythmia, conduction defects, and reduced ejection fraction [171].
Cardiac involvement in Becker muscular dystrophy [171] is often out of proportion with skeletal muscle involvement, additionally taxed by increased level of gross motor activity, with cardiac transplantation a viable option in some cases. Emery Dreifuss muscular dystrophy (EDMD) is typically characterized by cardiac conduction defects [53]. Cardiac care of individuals in MDs is more anticipatory and preventative than in the past. With increased survival, pacemakers and defibrillators are beginning to be used for some individuals [169].
Carriers of DMD/BMD may have cardiac manifestations and should be assessed and followed [170].
Maintaining Function
-
At every age, and every stage, age-appropriate function, participation in all aspects of life in which the individual is interested, and maximal independence should be supported.
-
The bottom line should always be—“can he/she keep up with his/her peers?”
-
Technology is the key to freedom in many situations.
Adaptive Equipment and Assistive Technology
-
Mobility devices:
-
Manual, motorized, power assist, scooters
-
Custom seating
-
Power positioning components:
-
Power tilt
-
Power recline
-
Separately elevating power elevating leg rests
-
Powered seat elevation
-
Powered standing and powered stand and drive
-
-
-
Cycles, power assist cycles
-
Standers
-
Power adjustable beds and pressure relieving mattresses
-
Lifts and transfer devices, powered lift (including ceiling lifts, pivot lifts, stair lifts, powered patient lifts)
-
Upper extremity supports (forearm supports, robotics elbow blocks to keep hand from sliding away from joystick)
-
Mini-proportional joy sticks
-
Computer access, infra-red environmental control, bluetooth, voice activation, eye gaze systems
-
Internet access
-
Environmental control units (infra-red and bluetooth)
-
Prism glasses for reading in bed or with limited mobility in neck flexion
-
Bidets
-
Bath and shower chairs
-
Respiratory equipment:
-
Cough assist
-
BiPAP and noninvasive ventilation
-
Vest
-
-
Ramps, portable ramps, van lifts, vertical platform lifts
-
Bathing and bathrooming equipment that fosters ease and independence
-
Power operated beds
-
Handheld devices (smart phones, tablets, etc.)
-
Modified sports equipment
Sports/Adapted Sports
-
Swimming, cycling, wheelchair/adapted sports, dance
Conclusion
Remarkable advances and progress in research raise hopes for finding treatments and cures for many of the genetically determined neuromuscular disorders. If quality of life is the focus for all individuals as we wait for more specific treatment and cures, effective intervention can be offered in many areas by using continually updated skills and resources, ingenuity, and a comprehensive understanding of each neuromuscular disorder. Comprehensive, anticipatory physical therapy (PT) management of MD is based upon an understanding of the pathokinesiology of each type of MD, an understanding of the progression of the pathokinesiology over time, individual evaluation within the context of each individual’s life and goals, and provision of consistent, anticipatory, preventative management across the lifespan in order to minimize the clinical and functional impact of the diagnosis and to optimize quality of life. Optimal management is important for each individual not only for the sake of each day that is experienced as we wait for a cure but also for protection of the future that unfolds for that individual, and in order to help individuals stay in the best possible condition to make use of cures as they are found.
References
Vignos PJ. Rehabilitation in progressive muscular dystrophy. New Haven: Licht; 1968.
Dubowitz V. Progressive muscular dystrophy: prevention of deformities. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1964;12:323–8.
Dubowitz V. Muscle disorders in childhood. 2nd ed. London: Saunders; 1995.
Bushby KM, Pollitt C, Johnson MA, Rogers MT, Chinnery PF. Muscle pain as a prominent feature of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD): four illustrative case reports. Neuromuscul Disord. 1998;8(8):574–9.
Bushby K, Finkel R, Birnkrant DJ, et al. Diagnosis and management of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, part 1: diagnosis, and pharmacological and psychosocial management. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(1):77–93.
Bushby K, Finkel R, Birnkrant DJ, et al. Diagnosis and management of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, part 2: implementation of multidisciplinary care. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(2):177–89.
Bushby KM. The muscular dystrophies. Baillieres Clin Neurol. 1994;3(2):407–30.
Bushby KM, Gardner-Medwin D, Nicholson LV, et al. The clinical, genetic and dystrophin characteristics of Becker muscular dystrophy. II. Correlation of phenotype with genetic and protein abnormalities. J Neurol. 1993;240(2):105–12.
Bushby KM, Gardner-Medwin D. The clinical, genetic and dystrophin characteristics of Becker muscular dystrophy. I. Natural history. J Neurol. 1993;240(2):98–104.
Guglieri M, Straub V, Bushby K, Lochmuller H. Limb-girdle muscular dystrophies. Curr Opin Neurol. 2008;21(5):576–84.
Dubowitz V. Prevention of deformities. Isr J Med Sci. 1977;13(2):183–8.
Wang CH, Bonnemann CG, Rutkowski A, et al. Consensus statement on standard of care for congenital muscular dystrophies. J Child Neurol. 2010;25(12):1559–81.
Personius KE, Pandya S, King WM, Tawil R, McDermott MP. Facioscapulohumeral dystrophy natural history study: standardization of testing procedures and reliability of measurements. The FSH DY Group. Phys Ther. 1994;74(3):253–63.
Roy L, Gibson DA. Pseudohypertrophic muscular dystrophy and its surgical management: review of 30 patients. Can J Surg. 1970;13(1):13–21.
Kilmer DD, Abresch RT, McCrory MA, et al. Profiles of neuromuscular diseases. Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;74(5 Suppl):S131–9.
McDonald CM, Abresch RT, Carter GT, Fowler Jr WM, Johnson ER, Kilmer DD. Profiles of neuromuscular diseases. Becker’s muscular dystrophy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;74(5 Suppl):S93–103.
McDonald CM, Abresch RT, Carter GT, et al. Profiles of neuromuscular diseases. Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;74(5 Suppl):S70–92.
McDonald CM, Johnson ER, Abresch RT, Carter GT, Fowler Jr WM, Kilmer DD. Profiles of neuromuscular diseases. Limb-girdle syndromes. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;74(5 Suppl):S117–30.
Fowler Jr WM. Rehabilitation management of muscular dystrophy and related disorders: II. Comprehensive care. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1982;63(7):322–8.
Miller G, Dunn N. An outline of the management and prognosis of Duchenne muscular dystrophy in Western Australia. Aust Paediatr J. 1982;18(4):277–82.
Scott OM, Hyde SA, Goddard C, Dubowitz V. Prevention of deformity in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. A prospective study of passive stretching and splintage. Physiotherapy. 1981;67(6):177–80.
Scott OM, Hyde SA, Goddard C, Jones R, Dubowitz V. Effect of exercise in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Physiotherapy. 1981;67(6):174–6.
Hyde SA, Scott OM, Goddard CM, Dubowitz V. Prolongation of ambulation in Duchenne muscular dystrophy by appropriate orthoses. Physiotherapy. 1982;68(4):105–8.
Johnson ER, Fowler Jr WM, Lieberman JS. Contractures in neuromuscular disease. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1992;73(9):807–10.
Cherry DB. Review of physical therapy alternatives for reducing muscle contracture. Phys Ther. 1980;60(7):877–81.
Harris SE, Cherry DB. Childhood progressive muscular dystrophy and the role of physical therapy. Phys Ther. 1974;54(1):4–12.
Johnson LB, Florence JM, Abresch RT. Physical therapy evaluation and management in neuromuscular diseases. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2012;23(3):633–51.
Stuberg WA. Muscular dystrophy and spinal muscular atrophy. In: Campbell SK, et al, editors. Physical therapy for children. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders; 2012.
Gardner-Medwin D. Management of muscular dystrophy. Physiotherapy. 1977;63(2):46–51.
Siegel IM. Pathomechanics of stance in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1972;53(9):403–6.
Sutherland DH, Olshen R, Cooper L, et al. The pathomechanics of gait in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1981;23(1):3–22.
Hsu JD, Furumasu J. Gait and posture changes in the Duchenne muscular dystrophy child. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993;288:122–5.
Siegel IM, Weiss LA. Postural substitution in Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy. JAMA. 1982;247(5):584.
Chyatte SB, Vignos Jr PJ, Watkins M. Early muscular dystrophy: differential patterns of weakness in Duchenne, limb-girdle and facioscapulohumeral types. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1966;47(8):499–503.
Siegel IM. Scoliosis in muscular dystrophy. Some comments about diagnosis, observations on prognosis, and suggestions for therapy. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1973;93:235–8.
Archibald KC, Vignos Jr PJ. A study of contractures in muscular dystrophy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1959;40(4):150–7.
Johnson EW, Kennedy JH. Comprehensive management of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1971;52(3):110–4.
Iannaccone ST, Russman BS, Browne RH, Buncher CR, White M, Samaha FJ. Prospective analysis of strength in spinal muscular atrophy. DCN/Spinal Muscular Atrophy Group. J Child Neurol. 2000;15(2):97–101.
Bodor M, McDonald CM. Why short stature is beneficial in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Muscle Nerve. 2013;48(3):336–42.
Bushby K. Diagnosis and management of the limb girdle muscular dystrophies. Pract Neurol. 2009;9(6):314–23.
Janssen BH, Voet NB, Nabuurs CI, et al. Distinct disease phases in muscles of facioscapulohumeral dystrophy patients identified by MR detected fat infiltration. PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e85416.
Bergsma A, Murgia A, Cup EH, Verstegen PP, Meijer K, de Groot IJ. Upper extremity kinematics and muscle activation patterns in subjects with facioscapulohumeral dystrophy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;95(9):1731–41.
Bergsma A, Cup EH, Geurts AC, de Groot IJ. Upper extremity function and activity in facioscapulohumeral dystrophy and limb-girdle muscular dystrophies: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2014;7:1–16.
Vignos Jr PJ, Spencer Jr GE, Archibald KC. Management of progressive muscular dystrophy in childhood. JAMA. 1963;184:89–96.
Vignos Jr PJ. Physical models of rehabilitation in neuromuscular disease. Muscle Nerve. 1983;6(5):323–38.
Johnson EW. Controversies about Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1980;22(3):401–2.
King W, Pandya S. Physical therapy & FSHD—a guide for patients and physical therapists. Lexington: FSH Society; 2009.
Tawil R, McDermott MP, Mendell JR, Kissel J, Griggs RC. Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD): design of natural history study and results of baseline testing. FSH-DY Group. Neurology. 1994;44(3 Pt 1):442–6.
Kissel JT. Facioscapulohumeral dystrophy. Semin Neurol. 1999;19(1):35–43.
Statland JM, McDermott MP, Heatwole C, et al. Reevaluating measures of disease progression in facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy. Neuromuscul Disord. 2013;23(4):306–12.
Tawil R, van der Maarel SM, Tapscott SJ. Facioscapulohumeral dystrophy: the path to consensus on pathophysiology. Skelet Muscle. 2014;4:12.
Emery AE. Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy and other related disorders. Br Med Bull. 1989;45(3):772–87.
Emery AE. Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy—a 40 year retrospective. Neuromuscul Disord. 2000;10(4–5):228–32.
Merlini L. Selectivity of muscle sparing in Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy. Neuromuscul Disord. 2009;19(7):500–1.
Vignos PJ, Wagner MB, Karlinchak B, Katirji B. Evaluation of a program for long-term treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Experience at the University Hospitals of Cleveland. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78(12):1844–52.
Kishnani PS, Steiner RD, Bali D, et al. Pompe disease diagnosis and management guideline. Genet Med. 2006;8(5):267–88.
Wang CH, Finkel RS, Bertini ES, et al. Consensus statement for standard of care in spinal muscular atrophy. J Child Neurol. 2007;22(8):1027–49.
World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability, and health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
Carter GT, Weiss MD, Chamberlain JR, et al. Aging with muscular dystrophy: pathophysiology and clinical management. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2010;21(2):429–50.
Mercuri E, Mayhew A, Muntoni F, et al. Towards harmonisation of outcome measures for DMD and SMA within TREAT-NMD; report of three expert workshops: TREAT-NMD/ENMC workshop on outcome measures, 12th–13th May 2007, Naarden, The Netherlands; TREAT-NMD workshop on outcome measures in experimental trials for DMD, 30th June–1st July 2007, Naarden, The Netherlands; conjoint Institute of Myology TREAT-NMD meeting on physical activity monitoring in neuromuscular disorders, 11th July 2007, Paris, France. Neuromuscul Disord. 2008;18(11):894–903.
Brooke MH, Griggs RC, Mendell JR, Fenichel GM, Shumate JB, Pellegrino RJ. Clinical trial in Duchenne dystrophy. I. The design of the protocol. Muscle Nerve. 1981;4(3):186–97.
Haley SM, Coster WJ, Ludlow LH, et al. The pediatric evaluation of disability inventory. Boston: Center for Rehabilitation Effectiveness, Boston University; 1992.
Varni JW, Seid M, Rode CA. The PedsQL: measurement model for the pediatric quality of life inventory. Med Care. 1999;37(2):126–39.
Krupp LB, LaRocca NG, Muir-Nash J, Steinberg AD. The fatigue severity scale. Application to patients with multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus. Arch Neurol. 1989;46(10):1121–3.
Brooke MH, Miller R. Fatigue testing. Muscle Nerve. 1990;13(Suppl):S35–7.
Learmonth YC, Dlugonski D, Pilutti LA, Sandroff BM, Klaren R, Motl RW. Psychometric properties of the Fatigue Severity Scale and the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale. J Neurol Sci. 2013;331(1–2):102–7.
McDonald CM, Henricson EK, Abresch RT, et al. The 6-minute walk test and other clinical endpoints in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: reliability, concurrent validity, and minimal clinically important differences from a multicenter study. Muscle Nerve. 2013;48(3):357–68.
McDonald CM, Henricson EK, Abresch RT, et al. The 6-minute walk test and other endpoints in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: longitudinal natural history observations over 48 weeks from a multicenter study. Muscle Nerve. 2013;48(3):343–56.
Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. Adv Clin Rehabil. 1987;1:6–18.
Ottenbacher KJ, Msall ME, Lyon NR, Duffy LC, Granger CV, Braun S. Interrater agreement and stability of the Functional Independence Measure for Children (WeeFIM): use in children with developmental disabilities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78(12):1309–15.
Lerman JA, Sullivan E, Haynes RJ. The Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI) and functional assessment in patients with adolescent or juvenile idiopathic scoliosis and congenital scoliosis or kyphosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002;27(18):2052–7. Discussion 2057–8.
Lerman JA, Sullivan E, Barnes DA, Haynes RJ. The Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI) and functional assessment of patients with unilateral upper extremity deficiencies. J Pediatr Orthop. 2005;25(3):405–7.
Lee KM, Chung CY, Park MS, et al. Level of improvement determined by PODCI is related to parental satisfaction after single-event multilevel surgery in children with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop. 2010;30(4):396–402.
Klepper SE. Measures of pediatric function: Child Health Assessment Questionnaire (C-HAQ), Juvenile Arthritis Functional Assessment Scale (JAFAS), Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI), and Activities Scale for Kids (ASK). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63 Suppl 11:S371–82.
Gates PE, Otsuka NY, Sanders JO, McGee-Brown J. Relationship between parental PODCI questionnaire and School Function Assessment in measuring performance in children with CP. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2008;50(9):690–5.
Gates PE, Campbell SR. Effects of age, sex, and comorbidities on the Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI) in the general population. J Pediatr Orthop. 2015;35(2):203–9.
Ward DS, Bar-Or O. Use of the Borg scale in exercise prescription for overweight youth. Can J Sport Sci. 1990;15(2):120–5.
Wilson RC, Jones PW. Long-term reproducibility of Borg scale estimates of breathlessness during exercise. Clin Sci (Lond). 1991;80(4):309–12.
Hommerding PX, Donadio MV, Paim TF, Marostica PJ. The Borg scale is accurate in children and adolescents older than 9 years with cystic fibrosis. Respir Care. 2010;55(6):729–33.
Florence JM, Pandya S, King WM, et al. Intrarater reliability of manual muscle test (Medical Research Council scale) grades in Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy. Phys Ther. 1992;72(2):115–22. Discussion 122–116.
Escolar DM, Henricson EK, Mayhew J, et al. Clinical evaluator reliability for quantitative and manual muscle testing measures of strength in children. Muscle Nerve. 2001;24(6):787–93.
Angelini C, Semplicini C, Tonin P, et al. Progress in enzyme replacement therapy in glycogen storage disease type II. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2009;2(3):143–53.
Angelini C, Semplicini C, Ravaglia S, et al. New motor outcome function measures in evaluation of late-onset Pompe disease before and after enzyme replacement therapy. Muscle Nerve. 2012;45(6):831–4.
Hagemans ML, Laforet P, Hop WJ, et al. Impact of late-onset Pompe disease on participation in daily life activities: evaluation of the Rotterdam Handicap Scale. Neuromuscul Disord. 2007;17(7):537–43.
McColl MA, Paterson M, Davies D, Doubt L, Law M. Validity and community utility of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Can J Occup Ther. 2000;67(1):22–30.
Law M, Baptiste S, McColl M, Opzoomer A, Polatajko H, Pollock N. The Canadian occupational performance measure: an outcome measure for occupational therapy. Can J Occup Ther. 1990;57(2):82–7.
Wilson RC, Jones PW. A comparison of the visual analogue scale and modified Borg scale for the measurement of dyspnoea during exercise. Clin Sci (Lond). 1989;76(3):277–82.
Mazzone ES, Messina S, Vasco G, et al. Reliability of the North Star Ambulatory Assessment in a multicentric setting. Neuromuscul Disord. 2009;19(7):458–61.
Mazzone E, Martinelli D, Berardinelli A, et al. North Star Ambulatory Assessment, 6-minute walk test and timed items in ambulant boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Neuromuscul Disord. 2010;20(11):712–6.
Mayhew A, Cano S, Scott E, Eagle M, Bushby K, Muntoni F. Moving towards meaningful measurement: Rasch analysis of the North Star Ambulatory Assessment in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2011;53(6):535–42.
Ergul Y, Ekici B, Nisli K, et al. Evaluation of the North Star Ambulatory Assessment scale and cardiac abnormalities in ambulant boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Paediatr Child Health. 2012;48(7):610–6.
Mayhew AG, Cano SJ, Scott E, et al. Detecting meaningful change using the North Star Ambulatory Assessment in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013;55(11):1046–52.
De Sanctis R, Pane M, Sivo S, et al. Suitability of North Star Ambulatory Assessment in young boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Neuromuscul Disord. 2015;25(1):14–8.
Raat H, Bonsel GJ, Essink-Bot ML, Landgraf JM, Gemke RJ. Reliability and validity of comprehensive health status measures in children: The Child Health Questionnaire in relation to the Health Utilities Index. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55(1):67–76.
Berard C, Payan C, Hodgkinson I, Fermanian J. A motor function measure for neuromuscular diseases. Construction and validation study. Neuromuscul Disord. 2005;15(7):463–70.
Young NL, Williams JI, Yoshida KK, Wright JG. Measurement properties of the activities scale for kids. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(2):125–37.
Young NL, Varni JW, Snider L, et al. The Internet is valid and reliable for child-report: an example using the Activities Scale for Kids (ASK) and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL). J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(3):314–20.
Main M, Kairon H, Mercuri E, Muntoni F. The Hammersmith functional motor scale for children with spinal muscular atrophy: a scale to test ability and monitor progress in children with limited ambulation. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2003;7(4):155–9.
Krosschell KJ, Maczulski JA, Crawford TO, Scott C, Swoboda KJ. A modified Hammersmith functional motor scale for use in multi-center research on spinal muscular atrophy. Neuromuscul Disord. 2006;16(7):417–26.
van Capelle CI, van der Beek NA, de Vries JM, et al. The quick motor function test: a new tool to rate clinical severity and motor function in Pompe patients. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2012;35(2):317–23.
McDonald CM, Widman LM, Walsh DD, Walsh SA, Abresch RT. Use of step activity monitoring for continuous physical activity assessment in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(4):802–8.
McDonald CM, Widman L, Abresch RT, Walsh SA, Walsh DD. Utility of a step activity monitor for the measurement of daily ambulatory activity in children. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(4):793–801.
Steffensen B, Hyde S, Lyager S, Mattsson E. Validity of the EK scale: a functional assessment of non-ambulatory individuals with Duchenne muscular dystrophy or spinal muscular atrophy. Physiother Res Int. 2001;6(3):119–34.
Piper MC, Darrah J. Motor assessment of the developing infant. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders; 1994.
Russell D, Rosenbaum P, Avery L, Lane M. Gross motor function measure (GMFM-66 & GMFM-88) user’s manual. London: Mac Keith; 2002.
Folio MR, Fewell R. Peabody developmental motor scales. 2nd ed. Austin: Pro-Ed; 2000.
Bruininks R. Bruininks-Oseretsky test of motor proficiency. 2nd ed. Minneapolis: Pearson; 2005.
Mayhew A, Mazzone ES, Eagle M, et al. Development of the performance of the upper limb module for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013;55(11):1038–45.
ATS Committee on Proficiency Standards for Clinical Pulmonary Function Laboratories. ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166(1):111–7.
Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O’Brien JP. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy. 1980;66(8):271–3.
Bieri D, Reeve RA, Champion GD, Addicoat L, Ziegler JB. The Faces Pain Scale for the self-assessment of the severity of pain experienced by children: development, initial validation, and preliminary investigation for ratio scale properties. Pain. 1990;41(2):139–50.
Krechel SW, Bildner J. CRIES: a new neonatal postoperative pain measurement score. Initial testing of validity and reliability. Paediatr Anaesth. 1995;5(1):53–61.
Pasero CL. Using the Faces scale to assess pain. Am J Nurs. 1997;97(7):19–20.
Ferrell BA, Stein WM, Beck JC. The Geriatric Pain Measure: validity, reliability and factor analysis. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48(12):1669–73.
McCaffery M. Choosing a faces pain scale. Nursing. 2002;32(5):68.
O’Rourke D. The measurement of pain in infants, children, and adolescents: from policy to practice. Phys Ther. 2004;84(6):560–70.
Salaffi F, Stancati A, Silvestri CA, Ciapetti A, Grassi W. Minimal clinically important changes in chronic musculoskeletal pain intensity measured on a numerical rating scale. Eur J Pain. 2004;8(4):283–91.
Tashjian RZ, Deloach J, Porucznik CA, Powell AP. Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for visual analog scales (VAS) measuring pain in patients treated for rotator cuff disease. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009;18(6):927–32.
McDonald CM. Limb contractures in progressive neuromuscular disease and the role of stretching, orthotics, and surgery. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 1998;9(1):187–211.
Siegel IM. Plastic-molded knee-ankle-foot orthoses in the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1975;56(7):322.
Siegel IM. Prolongation of ambulation through early percutaneous tenotomy and bracing with plastic orthoses. Isr J Med Sci. 1977;13(2):192–6.
Aprile I, Bordieri C, Gilardi A, et al. Balance and walking involvement in facioscapulohumeral dystrophy: a pilot study on the effects of custom lower limb orthoses. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2013;49(2):169–78.
Hyde SA, FlLytrup I, Glent S, et al. A randomized comparative study of two methods for controlling Tendo Achilles contracture in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Neuromuscul Disord. 2000;10(4–5):257–63.
Ward K, Alsop C, Caulton J, Rubin C, Adams J, Mughal Z. Low magnitude mechanical loading is osteogenic in children with disabling conditions. J Bone Miner Res. 2004;19(3):360–9.
Ashmore CR, Lee YB, Summers P, Hitchcock L. Stretch-induced growth in chicken wing muscles: nerve-muscle interaction in muscular dystrophy. Am J Physiol. 1984;246(5 Pt 1):C378–84.
Glanzman AM, Flickinger JM, Dholakia KH, Bonnemann CG, Finkel RS. Serial casting for the management of ankle contracture in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2011;23(3):275–9.
Main M, Mercuri E, Haliloglu G, Baker R, Kinali M, Muntoni F. Serial casting of the ankles in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: can it be an alternative to surgery? Neuromuscul Disord. 2007;17(3):227–30.
American Physical Therapy Association. Guide to physical therapy practice. Phys Ther. 2001;81(1).
Townsend EL, Tamhane H, Gross KD. Effects of AFO use on walking in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a pilot study. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2015;27(1):24–9.
Chyatte SB, Long II C, Vignos Jr PJ. The balanced forearm orthosis in muscular dystrophy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1965;46(9):633–6.
Han JJ, Kurillo G, Abresch RT, de Bie E, Nicorici A, Bajcsy R. Reachable workspace in facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD) by Kinect. Muscle Nerve. 2015;51(2):168–75.
Han JJ, Kurillo G, Abresch RT, Nicorici A, Bajcsy R. Validity, reliability, and sensitivity of a 3D vision sensor-based upper extremity reachable workspace evaluation in neuromuscular diseases. PLoS Curr. 2013;5.
Vignos Jr PJ, Archibald KC. Maintenance of ambulation in childhood muscular dystrophy. J Chronic Dis. 1960;12:273–90.
Spencer Jr GE, Vignos Jr PJ. Bracing for ambulation in childhood progressive muscular dystrophy. Am J Orthop. 1962;44-A:234–42.
Vignos Jr PJ, Wagner MB, Kaplan JS, Spencer Jr GE. Predicting the success of reambulation in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983;65(6):719–28.
Bowker JH, Halpin PJ. Factors determining success in reambulation of the child with progressive muscular dystrophy. Orthop Clin North Am. 1978;9(2):431–6.
Tardieu C, Lespargot A, Tabary C, Bret MD. For how long must the soleus muscle be stretched each day to prevent contracture? Dev Med Child Neurol. 1988;30(1):3–10.
Stuberg WA. Considerations related to weight-bearing programs in children with developmental disabilities. Phys Ther. 1992;72(1):35–40.
Spencer Jr GE. Orthopaedic care of progressive muscular dystrophy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1967;49(6):1201–4.
Alman BA, Raza SN, Biggar WD. Steroid treatment and the development of scoliosis in males with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A(3):519–24.
Brooke MH, Fenichel GM, Griggs RC, et al. Duchenne muscular dystrophy: patterns of clinical progression and effects of supportive therapy. Neurology. 1989;39(4):475–81.
Smith AD, Koreska J, Moseley CF. Progression of scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71(7):1066–74.
Siegel IM. Spinal stabilization in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: rationale and method. Muscle Nerve. 1982;5(5):417–8.
Gardner-Medwin D. Controversies about Duchenne muscular dystrophy. (2) Bracing for ambulation. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1979;21(5):659–62.
Kerr TP, Lin JP, Gresty MA, Morley T, Robb SA. Spinal stability is improved by inducing a lumbar lordosis in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a pilot study. Gait Posture. 2008;28(1):108–12.
Kinali M, Main M, Eliahoo J, et al. Predictive factors for the development of scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2007;11(3):160–6.
Muntoni F, Bushby K, Manzur AY. Muscular dystrophy campaign funded workshop on management of scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy 24 January 2005, London, UK. Neuromuscul Disord. 2006;16(3):210–9.
Rodillo EB, Fernandez-Bermejo E, Heckmatt JZ, Dubowitz V. Prevention of rapidly progressive scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy by prolongation of walking with orthoses. J Child Neurol. 1988;3(4):269–74.
Siegel IM. The management of muscular dystrophy: a clinical review. Muscle Nerve. 1978;1(6):453–60.
Wilkins KE, Gibson DA. The patterns of spinal deformity in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976;58(1):24–32.
Case LE. Physical therapy management of the spine in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Postgraduate fellowship project, Postgraduate fellowship in pediatric physical and occupational therapy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 1985.
Johnson EW, Yarnell SK. Hand dominance and scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1976;57(10):462–4.
Johnson EW, Walter J. Zeiter Lecture: pathokinesiology of Duchenne muscular dystrophy: implications for management. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1977;58(1):4–7.
Gibson DA, Albisser AM, Koreska J. Role of the wheelchair in the management of the muscular dystrophy patient. Can Med Assoc J. 1975;113(10):964–6.
Gibson DA, Wilkins KE. The management of spinal deformities in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. A new concept of spinal bracing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1975;108:41–51.
Koreska J, Robertson D, Mills RH, Gibson DA, Albisser AM. Biomechanics of the lumbar spine and its clinical significance. Orthop Clin North Am. 1977;8(1):121–33.
Werner BC, Skalsky AJ, McDonald CM, Han JJ. Convexity of scoliosis related to handedness in identical twin boys with Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy: a case report. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89(10):2021–4.
Bonsett CA. Prophylactic bracing in pseudohypertrophic muscular dystrophy (preliminary report) part I: patient experience. J Indiana State Med Assoc. 1975;68(3):181–4.
Bonsett CA, Glancy JJ. Prophylactic bracing in pseudohypertrophic muscular dystrophy (preliminary report). Part II: the brace. J Indiana State Med Assoc. 1975;68(3):185–7.
Brown JC, Zeller JL, Swank SM, Furumasu J, Warath SL. Surgical and functional results of spine fusion in spinal muscular atrophy. Spine. 1989;14(7):763–70.
Bleck EE. Mobility of patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1979;21(6):823–4.
Birnkrant DJ, Bushby KM, Amin RS, et al. The respiratory management of patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a DMD care considerations working group specialty article. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2010;45(8):739–48.
Finder JD, Birnkrant D, Carl J, et al. Respiratory care of the patient with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: ATS consensus statement. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004;170(4):456–65.
Eagle M, Baudouin SV, Chandler C, Giddings DR, Bullock R, Bushby K. Survival in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: improvements in life expectancy since 1967 and the impact of home nocturnal ventilation. Neuromuscul Disord. 2002;12(10):926–9.
ATS/ERS statement on respiratory muscle testing. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166(4):518–624.
Fauroux B, Quijano-Roy S, Desguerre I, Khirani S. The value of respiratory muscle testing in children with neuromuscular disease. Chest. 2015;147(2):552–9.
Topin N, Matecki S, Le Bris S, et al. Dose-dependent effect of individualized respiratory muscle training in children with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Neuromuscul Disord. 2002;12(6):576–83.
Bushby K, Muntoni F, Bourke JP. 107th ENMC international workshop: the management of cardiac involvement in muscular dystrophy and myotonic dystrophy. 7th–9th June 2002, Naarden, The Netherlands. Neuromuscul Disord. 2003;13(2):166–72.
Takano N, Honke K, Hasui M, Ohno I, Takemura H. A case of pacemaker implantation for complete atrioventricular block associated with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. No To Hattatsu. 1997;29(6):476–80.
Cripe LH, Tobias JD. Cardiac considerations in the operative management of the patient with Duchenne or Becker muscular dystrophy. Paediatr Anaesth. 2013;23(9):777–84.
Yilmaz A, Sechtem U. Cardiac involvement in muscular dystrophy: advances in diagnosis and therapy. Heart. 2012;98(5):420–9.
Vignos Jr PJ, Watkins MP. The effect of exercise in muscular dystrophy. JAMA. 1966;197(11):843–8.
Houser CR, Johnson DM. Breathing exercises for children with pseudohypertrophic muscular dystrophy. Phys Ther. 1971;51(7):751–9.
Fowler Jr WM, Taylor M. Rehabilitation management of muscular dystrophy and related disorders: I. The role of exercise. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1982;63(7):319–21.
Valentine BA, Blue JT, Cooper BJ. The effect of exercise on canine dystrophic muscle. Ann Neurol. 1989;26(4):588.
Armstrong RB, Warren GL, Warren JA. Mechanisms of exercise-induced muscle fibre injury. Sports Med. 1991;12(3):184–207.
McNeil PL, Khakee R. Disruptions of muscle fiber plasma membranes. Role in exercise-induced damage. Am J Pathol. 1992;140(5):1097–109.
Hayes A, Lynch GS, Williams DA. The effects of endurance exercise on dystrophic mdx mice. I. Contractile and histochemical properties of intact muscles. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1993;253(1336):19–25.
Lynch GS, Hayes A, Lam MH, Williams DA. The effects of endurance exercise on dystrophic mdx mice. II. Contractile properties of skinned muscle fibres. Proc Biol Sci. 1993;253(1336):27–33.
Brussee V, Tardif F, Tremblay JP. Muscle fibers of mdx mice are more vulnerable to exercise than those of normal mice. Neuromuscul Disord. 1997;7(8):487–92.
Hayes A, Williams DA. Contractile function and low-intensity exercise effects of old dystrophic (mdx) mice. Am J Physiol. 1998;274(4 Pt 1):C1138–44.
Eagle M. Report on the muscular dystrophy campaign workshop: exercise in neuromuscular diseases Newcastle, January 2002. Neuromuscul Disord. 2002;12(10):975–83.
Fowler Jr WM. Role of physical activity and exercise training in neuromuscular diseases. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;81(11 Suppl):S187–95.
Abresch RT, Carter GT, Han JJ, McDonald CM. Exercise in neuromuscular diseases. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2012;23(3):653–73.
Markert CD, Case LE, Carter GT, Furlong PA, Grange RW. Exercise and Duchenne muscular dystrophy: where we have been and where we need to go. Muscle Nerve. 2012;45(5):746–51.
Voet NB, Bleijenberg G, Padberg GW, van Engelen BG, Geurts AC. Effect of aerobic exercise training and cognitive behavioural therapy on reduction of chronic fatigue in patients with facioscapulohumeral dystrophy: protocol of the FACTS-2-FSHD trial. BMC Neurol. 2010;10:56.
Abresch RT, Han JJ, Carter GT. Rehabilitation management of neuromuscular disease: the role of exercise training. J Clin Neuromuscul Dis. 2009;11(1):7–21.
Rodillo E, Noble-Jamieson CM, Aber V, Heckmatt JZ, Muntoni F, Dubowitz V. Respiratory muscle training in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Arch Dis Child. 1989;64(5):736–8.
Gozal D, Thiriet P. Respiratory muscle training in neuromuscular disease: long-term effects on strength and load perception. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999;31(11):1522–7.
Estrup C, Lyager S, Noeraa N, Olsen C. Effect of respiratory muscle training in patients with neuromuscular diseases and in normals. Respiration. 1986;50(1):36–43.
Smith PE, Coakley JH, Edwards RH. Respiratory muscle training in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Muscle Nerve. 1988;11(7):784–5.
Aslan GK, Gurses HN, Issever H, Kiyan E. Effects of respiratory muscle training on pulmonary functions in patients with slowly progressive neuromuscular disease: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2013;28(6):573–81.
Peltekova I, Storr M. Case 1: back pain in a boy with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Paediatr Child Health. 2014;19(6):299–300.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Helpful Websites
Helpful Websites
Information About Diagnoses
-
http://www.mdausa.org/disease/40list.html (list of diagnoses covered by Muscular Dystrophy Association (MDA)
-
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/charcot_marie_tooth/detail_charcot_marie_tooth.htm
Adaptive Equipment/Assistive Technology/Orthotic Intervention
Orthotic Intervention
Lifts, Bathing, and Bathrooming Equipment
Respiratory Care
Oximeters: http://www.pulseoximeter.org/
Car Seats for Fragile Infants
Standers
Wheelchairs/Mobility Devices
Cycling
Other
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Case, L.E. (2015). Physical Therapy and Orthotic Devices. In: Huml, R. (eds) Muscular Dystrophy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17362-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17362-7_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17361-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17362-7
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)