ABSTRACT
Background: Anticholinergic adverse effects pose a relevant threat to patients, in particular elderly and cognitively impaired patients. Patients with Parkinsonian syndromes are especially at risk from anticholinergic adverse effects due to the often-required complex drug therapy. Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential effect of the anticholinergic burden on motor and non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease and atypical Parkinsonian syndromes. Methods: This cross-sectional, monocentric retrospective data analysis included 151 patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), 63 with progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), and 36 with multiple system atrophy (MSA). The anticholinergic burden of patients' medications was determined using two established scores: the Anticholinergic Drug Scale (ADS) and the German Anticholinergic Burden Scale (GABS). These scores were compared between the different diseases and correlated with several disease-specific scores. Results: Anticholinergic burden was higher in patients with PD, in particular, compared to PSP. In the PD group, anticholinergic burden showed a weak correlation with almost all analyzed clinical scores and the number of administered drugs. The UMSARS I and II showed a significant correlation with the anticholinergic burden in MSA patients. In general, the GABS-measured anticholinergic burden was significantly higher compared to the ADS-measured. Conclusions: The calculated anticholinergic burden affected motor and non-motor symptoms in patients with various Parkinsonian syndromes poorly. Since the GABS also contains basic anti-parkinsonian drugs, this score tended to overestimate the anticholinergic burden in patients with Parkinsonian syndromes and, therefore, seemed less appropriate for this application.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: In the wake of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, support in clinical trials by students of human medicine and related disciplines has become of even greater importance than in pre-pandemic times. Documentation in clinical trials adheres to the principles of Good Clinical Practice (GCP), and healthcare professionals involved in the conduct of clinical trials-including students-are obliged to perform documentation in accordance with GCP principles. Unprecedented challenges have arisen with regard to the appropriate training of students as training courses in presence had largely to be suspended due to social-distancing regulations during the heyday of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, novel training formats and self-study training materials for students working in clinical trials are urgently warranted. METHODS: To overcome this shortcoming and to define a common quality standard, an interdisciplinary, multiprofessional (physicians, study nurses, medical students), and binational (Germany, The Netherlands) expert panel convened and devised the Students' guide to documentation in clinical trials. RESULTS: Following a brief description of the different roles in clinical trials (e.g., sponsor, (principal) investigator, monitor) and an introduction into the principles of GCP, the documentation of adverse events, concomitant medication, medical history, and quality control are comprehensively discussed. The Guide concludes with a trilingual medical dictionary (English, German, Dutch) and with recommendations of pertinent literature for further reading. CONCLUSION: Serving both as textbook for self-training and as (quick-) reference work for the daily routine, the Guide has specifically been designed to complement, but not to replace practical training courses for students. While primarily addressed at students of human medicine and related disciplines, the Guide can also be of high relevance and utility to other healthcare professionals involved in the conduct of clinical trials.