Exploration of whether socioeconomic factors affect the results of priority setting partnerships: updating the top 10 research priorities for the management of Parkinson's in an international setting.

OBJECTIVES: Explore whether socioeconomic differences of patients affect the prioritisation of pre-existing research questions and explore the agreement between healthcare professionals (HCP) and patients in priority setting partnerships (PSPs). DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective, three centre survey across UK (400 participants), Tuebingen (176 participants) and Luxembourg (303 participants). People with Parkinson's (PwP), research participants, relatives and HCP associated with three Parkinson's cohort studies were invited to participate, along with linked centres (clinical care settings, research groups, charities). Responders were encouraged to pass on the survey to friends/families/carers. METHODS: The survey involved rating the importance of research questions on a Likert scale, allowing for the generation of one new question participants felt was particularly important. Collection of demographic information allowed for comparisons of priorities across a range of socioeconomic variables; the top 10 research priorities for each group were then compared. Questions added by participants were subject to a thematic analysis. RESULTS: 879 participants completed the survey (58% PwP, 22% family/friends, 13% HCP, 4% carers). Finding the best form of physiotherapy for PwP was the number one priority across the majority of analyses. HCP were the only subgroup not to place physiotherapy in the top 10. Factors most likely to affect prioritisation in PwP included educational level, presence of carer support and disease duration. There was little difference between other socioeconomic categories. CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomic factors modestly influenced some research priority ratings but did not significantly affect the top priority in most comparisons. Future studies must ensure patients from a range of socioeconomic backgrounds are recruited, ensuring results generalisable to the public while also identifying any key disparities in prioritisation. PSP should also take care that HCP do not skew results during prioritisation of questions, as in this study the most important priority to patients was not identified by professionals.

Quantifying activities of daily living impairment in Parkinson's disease using the Functional Activities Questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: Cognitive-driven activity of daily living (ADL) impairment in Parkinson's disease (PD) is increasingly discussed as prodromal marker for dementia. Diagnostic properties of assessments for this specific ADL impairment are sparsely investigated in PD. The ability of the Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) for differentiating between PD patients with normal cognition and with mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI), according to informant and self-reports, was examined. Global cognitive function in groups with and without mild ADL impairment was compared according to different cut-offs. METHODS: Multicenter data of 589 patients of an international cohort (CENTRE-PD) were analyzed. Analyses were run separately for informant-rated and self-rated FAQ. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was conducted to define the optimal FAQ cut-off for PD-MCI (≥ 1), and groups were additionally split according to reported FAQ cut-offs for PD-MCI in the literature (≥ 3, ≥ 5). Binary logistic regressions examined the effect of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score in PD patients with and without mild ADL impairment. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-five (38.2%) patients were classified as PD-MCI. For all three cut-off values, sensitivity was moderate to low (< 0.55), but specificity was moderately high (> 0.54) with a tendency of higher values for self-reported deficits. For the self-report, the cut-off ≥ 3 showed a significant effect of the MoCA (B = - 0.31, p = 0.003), where FAQ ≥ 3 patients had worse cognition. No effect for group differences based on informant ratings was detected. CONCLUSION: Our data argue that self-reported ADL impairments assessed by the FAQ show a relation to the severity of cognitive impairment in PD.

Longitudinal Changes in Parkinson's Disease Symptoms with and Without Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Behavior Disorder: The Oxford Discovery Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Parkinson's disease (PD) comorbid with rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (RBD) may show more severe motor and nonmotor symptoms, suggesting a distinct PD subtype. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of RBD on the longitudinal change of motor and nonmotor symptoms in patients with PD. METHODS: Patients with early PD (diagnosed within 3.5 years) recruited from 2010 to 2019 were followed every 18 months in the Oxford Parkinson's Disease Centre Discovery cohort. At each visit, we used standard questionnaires and measurements to assess demographic features and motor and nonmotor symptoms (including RBD, daytime sleepiness, mood, autonomic symptoms, cognition, and olfaction). Data were analyzed with linear mixed effects and Cox regression models. Possible RBD (pRBD) was longitudinally determined according to RBD Screening Questionnaire scores. RESULTS: A total of 923 patients were recruited (mean age: 67.1 ± 9.59 years; 35.9% female), and 788 had follow-up assessment(s) (mean: 4.8 ± 1.98 years, range: 1.3-8.3). Among them, 33.3% were identified as pRBD (PD + pRBD). Patients with PD + pRBD had more severe baseline symptoms and showed faster progression on Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale parts I and III, Purdue Pegboard test, and Beck Depression Inventory scores. Moreover, PD + pRBD was associated with an increased level of risk for mild cognitive impairment (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.83), freezing of gait (HR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.10-1.86), and frequent falling (HR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.02-2.60). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PD + pRBD progress faster on motor, mood, and cognitive symptoms, confirming a more aggressive PD subtype that can be identified at baseline and has major clinical implications. © 2021 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.