Balance problems and/or stiffness in gait can range from barely noticeable all the way to misalignments so pronounced that the person needs crutches (typically forearm crutches/lofstrand crutches) or a cane / walking stick to assist in ambulation. Less often, spasticity is severe enough to compel the person to use a wheelchair. In general, however, lower-extremity spasticity in spastic diplegia is rarely so great as to totally prevent ambulation—most people with the condition can walk, and can do so with at least a basic amount of overall stability. Regardless, from case to case, steeply varying degrees of imbalance, potential tripping over uneven terrain while walking, or needing to hold on to various surfaces or walls in certain circumstances to keep upright, are typically ever-present potential issues and are much more common occurrences amongst those with spastic diplegia than among those with a normal or near-normal gait pattern. Among some of the people with spastic diplegia who choose to be ambulatory on either an exclusive or predominant basis, one of the seemingly common lifestyle choices is for the person to ambulate within his or her home without an assistive device, and then to use the assistive device, if any, once outdoors. Others may use no assistive device in any indoor situation at all, while always using one when outdoors.
An especially puzzling aspect of this lies in the fact that cerebral palsy as defined by modern science was first discovered and specifically addressed well over 100 years ago and that it would therefore be reasonable to expect by now that at least some empirical data on the adult populations with these conditions would have long since been collected, especially over the second half of the 20th century when existing treatment technologies rapidly improved and new ones came into being. The vast majority of empirical data on the various forms of cerebral palsy is concerned near-exclusively with children (birth to about 10 years of age) and sometimes pre-teens and early teens (11-13). Some doctors attempt to provide their own personal justifications for keeping their CP specialities purely paediatric, but there is no objectively apparent set of reasons backed by any scientific consensus as to why medical science has made a point of researching adult cases of multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy and the various forms of cancer in young and older adults, but has failed to do so with CP. There are a few orthopaedic surgeons and neurosurgeons who claim to be gathering pace with various studies as of the past few years, but these claims do not yet seem to have been matched by real-world actualisation in terms of easily accessible and objectively verifiable resources available to the general public on the internet and in-person, where many, including medical-science researchers and doctors themselves, would more than likely agree such resources would ideally belong.