Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Translating Evidence to Advanced Parkinson's Disease Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Nijhuis, Frouke A P; Esselink, Rianne; de Bie, Rob M A; Groenewoud, Hans; Bloem, Bastiaan R; Post, Bart; Meinders, Marjan J.
Afiliação
  • Nijhuis FAP; Department of Neurology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Esselink R; Department of Neurology, Radboud University Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behavior, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • de Bie RMA; Department of Neurology, Radboud University Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behavior, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Groenewoud H; Department of Neurology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Bloem BR; Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Post B; Department of Neurology, Radboud University Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behavior, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Meinders MJ; Department of Neurology, Radboud University Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behavior, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Mov Disord ; 36(6): 1293-1307, 2021 06.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33797786
In the advanced stages of Parkinson's disease (PD), patients frequently experience disabling motor complications. Treatment options include deep brain stimulation (DBS), levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG), and continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion (CSAI). Choosing among these treatments is influenced by scientific evidence, clinical expertise, and patient preferences. To foster patient engagement in decision-making among the options, scientific evidence should be adjusted to their information needs. We conducted a systematic review from the patient perspective. First, patients selected outcomes for a treatment choice: quality of life, activities of daily living, ON and OFF time, and adverse events. Second, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis for each treatment versus best medical treatment using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Finally, the evidence was transformed into comprehensible and comparable information. We converted the meta-analysis results into the number of patients (per 100) who benefit clinically from an advanced treatment per outcome, based on the minimal clinically important difference and the cumulative distribution function. Although this approach allows for a comparison of outcomes across the three device-aided therapies, they have never been compared directly. The interpretation is hindered by the relatively short follow-up time in the included studies, usually less than 12 months. These limitations should be clarified to patients during the decision-making process. This review can help patients integrate the evidence with their own preferences, and with their clinician's expertise, to reach an informed decision. © 2021 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Doença de Parkinson Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Mov Disord Assunto da revista: NEUROLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Holanda

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Doença de Parkinson Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Mov Disord Assunto da revista: NEUROLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Holanda