Back

Midfrontal Oscillatory Alterations During Gait Imagination and Observation in Parkinson's Disease with Freezing of Gait

Leedom, M.; Espinoza, A. I.; Mancini, M.; Lench, D.; Singh, A.

2025-09-18 neurology
10.1101/2025.09.17.25335996 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundFreezing of gait (FOG) is a debilitating motor symptom of Parkinsons disease (PD) that reflects a breakdown in both motor automaticity and cognitive control. Cognitive strategies, such as motor imagery (gait imagination, GI) and action observation (gait observation, GO) are increasingly used in rehabilitation, yet their neural underpinnings in PD remain unclear. ObjectivesTo examine midfrontal oscillations during GI and GO in healthy controls (HC), people with PD without FOG (PDFOG-), and with FOG (PDFOG+). MethodsIn this study, we used electroencephalography (EEG) to examine midfrontal oscillations during GI and GO in HC (n=21), PDFOG- (n=16), and PDFOG+ (n=21). Resting-state EEG (eyes-closed and eyes-open) served as baselines. ResultsAcross tasks, both PD groups showed elevated midfrontal theta power relative to HC, while beta oscillations differentiated PDFOG- from PDFOG+. During GO, PDFOG- displayed higher power in both lower and higher frequency bands, whereas PDFOG+ showed reduced alpha and beta power compared to PDFOG-. In GI, PDFOG+ exhibited reduced beta power compared to PDFOG-. Importantly, slowing the pace of GI or GO in PDFOG+ led to reductions in delta, theta, and beta activity, approximating patterns observed in HC. ConclusionsThese findings suggest that GI and GO recruit overlapping but partially distinct control mechanisms, with impaired oscillatory engagement in PDFOG+. Slowing task pace appears to normalize midfrontal rhythms, potentially by reducing cognitive-motor demands. These oscillatory signatures provide mechanistic insight into gait-related dysfunction and supports the refinement of motor imagery and action observation as targeted rehabilitation strategies for PD.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.