Prevalence and Incidence of Parkinson's Disease in Latin America: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Parkinson's disease (PD) is a rapidly growing neurodegenerative disorder, but up-to-date epidemiological data are lacking in Latin America. We sought to estimate the prevalence and incidence of PD and parkinsonism in Latin America. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Scientific Electronic Library Online, and Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde or the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Literature databases for epidemiological studies reporting the prevalence or incidence of PD or parkinsonism in Latin America from their inception to 2022. Quality of studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist. Data were pooled via random-effects meta-analysis and analyzed by data source (cohort studies or administrative databases), sex, and age group. Significant differences between groups were determined by meta-regression. RESULTS: Eighteen studies from 13 Latin American countries were included in the review. Meta-analyses of 17 studies (nearly 4 million participants) found a prevalence of 472 (95% CI, 271-820) per 100,000 and three studies an incidence of 31 (95% CI, 23-40) per 100,000 person-years for PD; and seven studies found a prevalence of 4300 (95% CI, 1863-9613) per 100,000 for parkinsonism. The prevalence of PD differed by data source (cohort studies, 733 [95% CI, 427-1255] vs. administrative databases. 114 [95% CI, 63-209] per 100,000, P < 0.01), age group (P < 0.01), but not sex (P = 0.73). PD prevalence in ≥60 years also differed significantly by data source (cohort studies. 1229 [95% CI, 741-2032] vs. administrative databases, 593 [95% CI, 480-733] per 100,000, P < 0.01). Similar patterns were observed for parkinsonism. CONCLUSIONS: The overall prevalence and incidence of PD in Latin America were estimated. PD prevalence differed significantly by the data source and age, but not sex. © 2023 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Burden of Parkinsonism and Parkinson's Disease on Health Service Use and Outcomes in Latin America.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the burden of parkinsonism and Parkinson's disease (PD) in Latin America. Better understanding of health service use and clinical outcomes in PD is needed to improve its prognosis. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to estimate the burden of parkinsonism and PD in six Latin American countries. METHODS: 12,865 participants aged 65 years and older from the 10/66 population-based cohort study were analysed. Baseline assessments were conducted in 2003-2007 and followed-up 4 years later. Parkinsonism and PD were defined using current clinical criteria or self-reported diagnosis. Logistic regression models assessed the association between parkinsonism/PD with baseline health service use (community-based care or hospitalisation in the last 3 months) and Cox proportional hazards regression models with incident dependency (subjective assessment by interviewer based on informant interview) and mortality. Separate analyses for each country were combined via fixed effect meta-analysis. RESULTS: At baseline, the prevalence of parkinsonism and PD was 7.9% (n = 934) and 2.6% (n = 317), respectively. Only parkinsonism was associated with hospital admission at baseline (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.30-2.74). Among 7,296 participants without dependency at baseline, parkinsonism (HR 2.34, 95% CI 1.81-3.03) and PD (2.10, 1.37-3.24) were associated with incident dependency. Among 10,315 participants with vital status, parkinsonism (1.73, 1.50-1.99) and PD (1.38, 1.07-1.78) were associated with mortality. The Higgins I2 tests showed low to moderate levels of heterogeneity across countries. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that older people with parkinsonism or PD living in Latin America have higher risks of developing dependency and mortality but may have limited access to health services.

Prevalence and impact of neuropsychiatric symptoms in normal aging and neurodegenerative syndromes: A population-based study from Latin America.

BACKGROUND: Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPSs) are common in neurodegenerative diseases; however, little is known about the prevalence of NPSs in Hispanic populations. METHODS: Using data from community-dwelling participants age 65 years and older enrolled in the 10/66 study (N = 11,768), we aimed to estimate the prevalence of NPSs in Hispanic populations with dementia, parkinsonism, and parkinsonism-dementia (PDD) relative to healthy aging. The Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q) was used to assess NPSs. RESULTS: NPSs were highly prevalent in Hispanic populations with neurodegenerative disease; approximately 34.3%, 56.1%, and 61.2% of the participants with parkinsonism, dementia, and PDD exhibited three or more NPSs, respectively. NPSs were the major contributor to caregiver burden. DISCUSSION: Clinicians involved in the care of elderly populations should proactively screen for NPSs, especially in patients with parkinsonism, dementia, and PPD, and develop intervention plans to support families and caregivers. Highlights Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPSs) are highly prevalent in Hispanic populations with neurodegenerative diseases. In healthy Hispanic populations, NPSs are predominantly mild and not clinically significant. The most common NPSs include depression, sleep disorders, irritability, and agitation. NPSs explain a substantial proportion of the variance in global caregiver burden.

Systematic review of the utility of the frailty index and frailty phenotype to predict all-cause mortality in older people.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for healthcare of community-dwelling older people advocate screening for frailty to predict adverse health outcomes, but there is no consensus on the optimum instrument to use in such settings. The objective of this systematic review of population studies was to compare the ability of the frailty index (FI) and frailty phenotype (FP) instruments to predict all-cause mortality in older people. METHODS: Studies published before 27 July 2022 were identified using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL databases. The eligibility criteria were population-based prospective studies of community-dwelling older adults (aged 65 years or older) and evaluation of both the FI and FP for prediction of all-cause mortality. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network's Methodology checklist was used to assess study quality. The areas under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUC) were compared, and the proportions of included studies that achieved acceptable discriminatory power (AUC>0.7) were calculated for each frailty instrument. The results were stratified by the use of continuous or categorical formats of each instrument. The review was reported in accordance with the PRISMA and SWiM guidelines. RESULTS: Among 8 studies (range: 909 to 7713 participants), both FI and FP had comparable predictive power for all-cause mortality. The AUC values ranged from 0.66 to 0.84 for FI continuous, 0.60 to 0.80 for FI categorical, 0.63 to 0.80 for FP continuous and 0.57 to 0.79 for FP categorical. The proportion of studies achieving acceptable discriminatory power were 75%, 50%, 63%, and 50%, respectively. The predictive ability of each frailty instrument was unaltered by the number of included items. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differences in their content, both the FI and FP instruments had modest but comparable ability to predict all-cause mortality. The use of continuous rather than categorical formats in either instrument enhanced their ability to predict all-cause mortality.

Variability and agreement of frailty measures and risk of falls, hospital admissions and mortality in TILDA.

Little is known about the within-person variability of different frailty instruments, their agreement over time, and whether use of repeat assessments could improve the strength of associations with adverse health outcomes. Repeat measurements recorded in 2010-2011 (Wave 1) and 2012 (Wave 2) from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA) were used to classify individuals with frailty using the frailty phenotype (FP) and frailty index (FI). Within-person variability and agreement of frailty classifications were assessed using ANOVA and kappa (K) statistics, respectively. Associations of each frailty measure (wave 1, wave 2, or mean of both waves) with risk of falls, hospitalisations and all-cause mortality were assessed using logistic regression. Among 7455 individuals (mean age 64.7 [SD 9.9] years), within-person SD was 0.664 units (95% CI 0.654-0.671) for FP and 2 health deficits (SD 0.050 [0.048-0.051]) for FI. Agreement of frailty was modest for both measures, but higher for FI (K 0.600 [0.584-0.615]) than FP (K 0.370 [0.348-0.401]). The odds ratios (ORs) for all-cause mortality were higher for frailty assessed using the mean of two versus single measurements for FI (ORs for mortality 3.5 [2.6-4.9] vs. 2.7 [1.9-3.4], respectively) and FP (ORs for mortality 6.9 [4.6-10.3] vs. 4.0 [2.8-5.635], respectively). Frailty scores based on single measurements had substantial within-person variability, but the agreement in classification of frailty was higher for FI than FP. Frailty assessed using the mean of two or more measurements recorded at separate visits was more strongly associated with adverse health outcomes than those recorded at a single visit.