Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 56
Filtrar
1.
BMJ Open ; 9(7): e027953, 2019 Jul 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31315864

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of botulinum toxin for prevention of migraine in adults. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and trial registries. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of botulinum toxin compared with placebo, active treatment or clinically relevant different dose for adults with chronic or episodic migraine, with or without the additional diagnosis of medication overuse headache. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Cochrane methods were used to review double-blind RCTs. Twelve week post-treatment time-point data was analysed. RESULTS: Twenty-eight trials (n=4190) were included. Trial quality was mixed. Botulinum toxin treatment resulted in reduced frequency of -2.0 migraine days/month (95% CI -2.8 to -1.1, n=1384) in chronic migraineurs compared with placebo. An improvement was seen in migraine severity, measured on a numerical rating scale 0 to 10 with 10 being maximal pain, of -2.70 cm (95% CI -3.31 to -2.09, n=75) and -4.9 cm (95% CI -6.56 to -3.24, n=32) for chronic and episodic migraine respectively. Botulinum toxin had a relative risk of treatment related adverse events twice that of placebo, but a reduced risk compared with active comparators (relative risk 0.76, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.98) and a low withdrawal rate (3%). Although individual trials reported non-inferiority to oral treatments, insufficient data were available for meta-analysis of effectiveness outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In chronic migraine, botulinum toxin reduces migraine frequency by 2 days/month and has a favourable safety profile. Inclusion of medication overuse headache does not preclude its effectiveness. Evidence to support or refute efficacy in episodic migraine was not identified.

2.
Clin Linguist Phon ; 33(10-11): 1063-1070, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31035809

RESUMO

Intelligibility of speech is a key outcome in speech and language therapy (SLT) and research. SLT students frequently participate as raters of intelligibility but we lack information about whether they rate intelligibility in the same way as the general public. This paper aims to determine if there is a difference in the intelligibility ratings made by SLT students (trained in speech related topics) compared to individuals from the general public (untrained). The SLT students were in year 2 of a BSc programme or the first 6 months of a MSc programme. We recorded 10 speakers with Parkinson's disease (PD) related speech reading aloud the words and sentences from the Assessment of Intelligibility of Dysarthric Speech. These speech recordings were rated for intelligibility by 'trained' raters and 'untrained' raters. The effort required to understand the speech was also reported. There were no significant differences in the measures of intelligibility from the trained and untrained raters for words or sentences after adjusting for speaker by including them as a covariate in the model. There was a slight increase in effort reported by the untrained raters for the sentences. This difference in reported effort was not evident with the words. SLT students can be recruited alongside individuals from the general public as naïve raters for evaluating intelligibility in people with speech disorders.

3.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 6: CD011616, 2018 06 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29939406

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Migraine occurs in around 15% of adults and is ranked as the seventh most disabling disease amongst all diseases globally. Despite the available treatments many people suffer prolonged and frequent attacks which have a major impact on their quality of life. Chronic migraine is defined as 15 or more days of headache per month, at least eight of those days being migraine. People with episodic migraine have fewer than 15 headache days per month. Botulinum toxin type A has been licensed in some countries for chronic migraine treatment, due to the results of just two trials. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of botulinum toxins versus placebo or active treatment for the prevention or reduction in frequency of chronic or episodic migraine in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE & MEDLINE in Process, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry (to December 2017). We examined reference lists and carried out citation searches on key publications. We sent correspondence to major manufacturers of botulinum toxin. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, double-blind, controlled trials of botulinum toxin (any sero-type) injections into the head and neck for prophylaxis of chronic or episodic migraine in adults. Eligible comparators were placebo, alternative prophylactic agent or different dose of botulinum toxin. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials and extracted data. For continuous outcomes we used mean change data when available. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RRs). We used data from the 12-week post-treatment follow-up time point. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created two 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: Description of trialsWe found 90 articles describing 28 trials (4190 participants), which were eligible for inclusion. The longest treatment duration was three rounds of injections with three months between treatments, so we could not analyse long-term effects. For the primary analyses, we pooled data from both chronic and episodic participant populations. Where possible, we also separated data into chronic migraine, episodic migraine and 'mixed group' classification subgroups. Most trials (21 out of 28) were small (fewer than 50 participants per trial arm). The risk of bias for included trials was low or unclear across most domains, with some trials reporting a high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data and selective outcome reporting.Botulinum toxin versus placeboTwenty-three trials compared botulinum toxin with placebo. Botulinum toxin may reduce the number of migraine days per month in the chronic migraine population by 3.1 days (95% confidence interval (CI) -4.7 to -1.4, 4 trials, 1497 participants, low-quality evidence). This was reduced to -2 days (95% CI -2.8 to -1.1, 2 trials, 1384 participants; moderate-quality evidence) when we removed small trials.A single trial of people with episodic migraine (N = 418) showed no difference between groups for this outcome measure (P = 0.49).In the chronic migraine population, botulinum toxin reduces the number of headache days per month by 1.9 days (95% CI -2.7 to -1.0, 2 trials, 1384 participants, high-quality evidence). We did not find evidence of a difference in the number of migraine attacks for both chronic and episodic migraine participants (6 trials, N = 2004, P = 0.30, low-quality evidence). For the population of both chronic and episodic migraine participants a reduction in severity of migraine rated during clinical visits, on a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS) of 3.3 cm (95% CI -4.2 to -2.5, very low-quality evidence) in favour of botulinum toxin treatment came from four small trials (N = 209); better reporting of this outcome measure from the additional eight trials that recorded it may have improved our confidence in the pooled estimate. Global assessment and quality-of-life measures were poorly reported and it was not possible to carry out statistical analysis of these outcome measures. Analysis of adverse events showed an increase in the risk ratio with treatment with botulinum toxin over placebo 30% (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.47, moderate-quality evidence). For every 100 participants 60 experienced an adverse event in the botulinum toxin group compared with 47 in the placebo group.Botulinum toxin versus other prophylactic agentThree trials studied comparisons with alternative oral prophylactic medications. Meta-analyses were not possible for number of migraine days, number of headache days or number of migraine attacks due to insufficient data, but individually trials reported no differences between groups for a variety of efficacy measures in the population of both chronic and episodic migraine participants. The global impression of disease measured using Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) scores were reported from two trials that showed no difference between groups. Compared with oral treatments, botulinum toxin showed no between-group difference in the risk of adverse events (2 trials, N = 114, very low-quality evidence). The relative risk reduction (RRR) for withdrawing from botulinum toxin due to adverse events compared with the alternative prophylactic agent was 72% (P = 0.02, 2 trials, N = 119).Dosing trialsThere were insufficient data available for the comparison of different doses.Quality of the evidenceThe quality of the evidence assessed using GRADE methods was varied but mostly very low; the quality of the evidence for the placebo and active control comparisons was low and very low, respectively for the primary outcome measure. Small trial size, high risk of bias and unexplained heterogeneity were common reasons for downgrading the quality of the evidence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In chronic migraine, botulinum toxin type A may reduce the number of migraine days per month by 2 days compared with placebo treatment. Non-serious adverse events were probably experienced by 60/100 participants in the treated group compared with 47/100 in the placebo group. For people with episodic migraine, we remain uncertain whether or not this treatment is effective because the quality of this limited evidence is very low. Better reporting of outcome measures in published trials would provide a more complete evidence base on which to draw conclusions.


Assuntos
Toxinas Botulínicas Tipo A/uso terapêutico , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Doença Crônica , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
4.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29344405

RESUMO

Background: Speech-related problems are common in Parkinson's disease (PD), but there is little evidence for the effectiveness of standard speech and language therapy (SLT) or Lee Silverman Voice Treatment (LSVT LOUD®). Methods: The PD COMM pilot was a three-arm, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial (RCT) of LSVT LOUD®, SLT and no intervention (1:1:1 ratio) to assess the feasibility and to inform the design of a full-scale RCT. Non-demented patients with idiopathic PD and speech problems and no SLT for speech problems in the past 2 years were eligible. LSVT LOUD® is a standardised regime (16 sessions over 4 weeks). SLT comprised individualised content per local practice (typically weekly sessions for 6-8 weeks). Outcomes included recruitment and retention, treatment adherence, and data completeness. Outcome data collected at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months included patient-reported voice and quality of life measures, resource use, and assessor-rated speech recordings. Results: Eighty-nine patients were randomised with 90% in the therapy groups and 100% in the control group completing the trial. The response rate for Voice Handicap Index (VHI) in each arm was ≥ 90% at all time-points. VHI was highly correlated with the other speech-related outcome measures. There was a trend to improvement in VHI with LSVT LOUD® (difference at 3 months compared with control: - 12.5 points; 95% CI - 26.2, 1.2) and SLT (difference at 3 months compared with control: - 9.8 points; 95% CI - 23.2, 3.7) which needs to be confirmed in an adequately powered trial. Conclusion: Randomisation to a three-arm trial of speech therapy including a no intervention control is feasible and acceptable. Compliance with both interventions was good. VHI and other patient-reported outcomes were relevant measures and provided data to inform the sample size for a substantive trial. Trial registration: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register: ISRCTN75223808. registered 22 March 2012.

5.
Trials ; 18(1): 397, 2017 08 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28851443

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The PD COMM trial is a phase III multi-centre randomised controlled trial whose aim is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two approaches to speech and language therapy (SLT) compared with no SLT intervention (control) for people with Parkinson's disease who have self-reported or carer-reported problems with their speech or voice. Our protocol describes the process evaluation embedded within the outcome evaluation whose aim is to evaluate what happened at the time of the PD COMM intervention implementation and to provide findings that will assist in the interpretation of the PD COMM trial results. Furthermore, the aim of the PD COMM process evaluation is to investigate intervention complexity within a theoretical model of how the trialled interventions might work best and why. METHODS/DESIGN: Drawing from the Normalization Process Theory and frameworks for implementation fidelity, a mixed method design will be used to address process evaluation research questions. Therapists' and participants' perceptions and experiences will be investigated via in-depth interviews. Critical incident reports, baseline survey data from therapists, treatment record forms and home practice diaries also will be collected at relevant time points throughout the running of the PD COMM trial. Process evaluation data will be analysed independently of the outcome evaluation before the two sets of data are then combined. DISCUSSION: To date, there are a limited number of published process evaluation protocols, and few are linked to trials investigating rehabilitation therapies. Providing a strong theoretical framework underpinning design choices and being tailored to meet the complex characteristics of the trialled interventions, our process evaluation has the potential to provide valuable insight into which components of the interventions being delivered in PD COMM worked best (and what did not), how they worked well and why. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN12421382 . Registered on 18 April 2016.


Assuntos
Doença de Parkinson/terapia , Patologia da Fala e Linguagem/métodos , Qualidade da Voz , Treinamento da Voz , Protocolos Clínicos , Análise Custo-Benefício , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Humanos , Doença de Parkinson/diagnóstico , Doença de Parkinson/economia , Doença de Parkinson/fisiopatologia , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica , Projetos de Pesquisa , Patologia da Fala e Linguagem/economia , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Reino Unido
6.
Rehabil Res Pract ; 2016: 1654282, 2016.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27630774

RESUMO

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1155/2015/839895.].

7.
Health Technol Assess ; 20(63): 1-96, 2016 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27580669

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Cochrane reviews of physiotherapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) for Parkinson's disease found insufficient evidence of effectiveness, but previous trials were methodologically flawed with small sample size and short-term follow-up. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of individualised PT and OT in Parkinson's disease. DESIGN: Large pragmatic randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Thirty-eight neurology and geriatric medicine outpatient clinics in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Seven hundred and sixty-two patients with mild to moderate Parkinson's disease reporting limitations in activities of daily living (ADL). INTERVENTION: Patients were randomised online to either both PT and OT NHS services (n = 381) or no therapy (n = 381). Therapy incorporated a patient-centred approach with individual assessment and goal setting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was instrumental ADL measured by the patient-completed Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) scale at 3 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life [Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39); European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D)], adverse events, resource use and carer quality of life (Short Form questionnaire-12 items). Outcomes were assessed before randomisation and at 3, 9 and 15 months after randomisation. RESULTS: Data from 92% of the participants in each group were available at the primary time point of 3 months, but there was no difference in NEADL total score [difference 0.5 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.7 to 1.7; p = 0.4] or PDQ-39 summary index (0.007 points, 95% CI -1.5 to 1.5; p = 1.0) between groups. The EQ-5D quotient was of borderline significance in favour of therapy (-0.03, 95% CI -0.07 to -0.002; p = 0.04). Contact time with therapists was for a median of four visits of 58 minutes each over 8 weeks (mean dose 232 minutes). Repeated measures analysis including all time points showed no difference in NEADL total score, but PDQ-39 summary index (curves diverging at 1.6 points per annum, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.62; p = 0.005) and EQ-5D quotient (0.02, 95% CI 0.00007 to 0.03; p = 0.04) showed significant but small differences in favour of the therapy arm. Cost-effective analysis showed that therapy was associated with a slight but not significant gain in quality-adjusted life-years (0.027, 95% CI -0.010 to 0.065) at a small incremental cost (£164, 95% CI -£141 to £468), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of under £4000 (£3493, 95% -£169,371 to £176,358). There was no difference in adverse events or serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: NHS PT and OT did not produce immediate or long-term clinically meaningful improvements in ADL or quality of life in patients with mild to moderate Parkinson's disease. This evidence does not support the use of low-dose, patient-centred, goal-directed PT and OT in patients in the early stages of Parkinson's disease. Future research should include the development and testing of more structured and intensive PT and OT programmes in patients with all stages of Parkinson's disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17452402. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, received support from the UK Department of Health up to March 2012. Catherine Sackley was supported by a NIHR senior investigator award, Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care East of England and West Midlands Strategic Health Authority Clinical Academic Training award.


Assuntos
Terapia Ocupacional/economia , Terapia Ocupacional/métodos , Doença de Parkinson/reabilitação , Modalidades de Fisioterapia/economia , Atividades Cotidianas , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Análise Custo-Benefício , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Qualidade de Vida , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Medicina Estatal , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica , Reino Unido
9.
Lancet Neurol ; 15(6): 585-96, 2016 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27017469

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Parkinson's disease has been reported in a small number of patients with chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. In this study, we screened a series of large, independent Parkinson's disease case-control studies for deletions at 22q11.2. METHODS: We used data on deletions spanning the 22q11.2 locus from four independent case-control Parkinson's disease studies (UK Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium 2, Dutch Parkinson's Disease Genetics Consortium, US National Institute on Aging, and International Parkinson's Disease Genomics Consortium studies), which were independent of the original reports of chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. We did case-control association analysis to compare the proportion of 22q11.2 deletions found, using the Fisher's exact test for the independent case-control studies and the Mantel-Haenszel test for the meta-analyses. We retrieved clinical details of patients with Parkinson's disease who had 22q11.2 deletions from the medical records of these patients. FINDINGS: We included array-based copy number variation data from 9387 patients with Parkinson's disease and 13 863 controls. Eight patients with Parkinson's disease and none of the controls had 22q11.2 deletions (p=0·00082). In the 8451 patients for whom age at onset data were available, deletions at 22q11.2 were associated with Parkinson's disease age at onset (Mann-Whitney U test p=0·001). Age at onset of Parkinson's disease was lower in patients carrying a 22q11.2 deletion (median 37 years, 95% CI 32·0-55·5; mean 42·1 years [SD 11·9]) than in those who did not carry a deletion (median 61 years, 95% CI 60·5-61·0; mean 60·3 years [SD 12·8]). A 22q11.2 deletion was present in more patients with early-onset (p<0·0001) and late-onset Parkinson's disease (p=0·016) than in controls, and in more patients with early-onset than late-onset Parkinson's disease (p=0·005). INTERPRETATION: Clinicians should be alert to the possibility of 22q11.2 deletions in patients with Parkinson's disease who have early presentation or features associated with the chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome, or both. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council, UK Wellcome Trust, Parkinson's UK, Patrick Berthoud Trust, National Institutes of Health, "Investissements d'Avenir" ANR-10-IAIHU-06, Dutch Parkinson Foundation (Parkinson Vereniging), Neuroscience Campus Amsterdam, National Institute for Health Research, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health.


Assuntos
Síndrome de DiGeorge/genética , Estudo de Associação Genômica Ampla , Doença de Parkinson/genética , Adulto , Idade de Início , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Comorbidade , Variações do Número de Cópias de DNA , Síndrome de DiGeorge/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Doença de Parkinson/epidemiologia
10.
JAMA Neurol ; 73(3): 291-9, 2016 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26785394

RESUMO

IMPORTANCE: It is unclear whether physiotherapy and occupational therapy are clinically effective and cost-effective in Parkinson disease (PD). OBJECTIVE: To perform a large pragmatic randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of individualized physiotherapy and occupational therapy in PD. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The PD REHAB Trial was a multicenter, open-label, parallel group, controlled efficacy trial. A total of 762 patients with mild to moderate PD were recruited from 38 sites across the United Kingdom. Recruitment took place between October 2009 and June 2012, with 15 months of follow-up. INTERVENTIONS: Participants with limitations in activities of daily living (ADL) were randomized to physiotherapy and occupational therapy or no therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) Scale score at 3 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (assessed by Parkinson Disease Questionnaire-39 and EuroQol-5D); adverse events; and caregiver quality of life. Outcomes were assessed before trial entry and then 3, 9, and 15 months after randomization. RESULTS: Of the 762 patients included in the study (mean [SD] age, 70 [9.1] years), 381 received physiotherapy and occupational therapy and 381 received no therapy. At 3 months, there was no difference between groups in NEADL total score (difference, 0.5 points; 95% CI, -0.7 to 1.7; P = .41) or Parkinson Disease Questionnaire-39 summary index (0.007 points; 95% CI, -1.5 to 1.5; P = .99). The EuroQol-5D quotient was of borderline significance in favor of therapy (-0.03; 95% CI, -0.07 to -0.002; P = .04). The median therapist contact time was 4 visits of 58 minutes over 8 weeks. Repeated-measures analysis showed no difference in NEADL total score, but Parkinson Disease Questionnaire-39 summary index (diverging 1.6 points per annum; 95% CI, 0.47 to 2.62; P = .005) and EuroQol-5D score (0.02; 95% CI, 0.00007 to 0.03; P = .04) showed small differences in favor of therapy. There was no difference in adverse events. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Physiotherapy and occupational therapy were not associated with immediate or medium-term clinically meaningful improvements in ADL or quality of life in mild to moderate PD. This evidence does not support the use of low-dose, patient-centered, goal-directed physiotherapy and occupational therapy in patients in the early stages of PD. Future research should explore the development and testing of more structured and intensive physical and occupational therapy programs in patients with all stages of PD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN17452402.


Assuntos
Atividades Cotidianas , Terapia Ocupacional/métodos , Avaliação de Resultados (Cuidados de Saúde) , Doença de Parkinson/terapia , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Falha de Tratamento , Reino Unido
13.
Rehabil Res Pract ; 2015: 839895, 2015.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26236508

RESUMO

Purpose. Parkinson's disease can produce a range of speech-language pathologies, which may require intervention. While evaluations of speech-language therapy have been undertaken, no work has been undertaken to capture patients' experiences of therapy. This was the aim of the present study. Methods. Semistructured interviews, using themes derived from the literature, were conducted with nine Parkinson's disease patients, all of whom had undergone speech-language therapy. Participants' responses were analysed in accordance with Thematic Network Analysis. Results. Four themes emerged: emotional reactions (frustration, embarrassment, lack of confidence, disappointment, and anxiety); physical impact (fatigue, breathing and swallowing, and word production); practical aspects (cost of treatment, waiting times, and the actual clinical experience); and expectations about treatment (met versus unmet). Conclusions. While many benefits of speech-language therapy were reported, several negative issues emerged which could impact adversely on rehabilitation. Parkinson's disease is associated with a range of psychological and physical sequelae, such as fatigue and depression; recognising any individual experiences which could exacerbate the existing condition and incorporating these into treatment planning may improve rehabilitation outcomes.

14.
Parkinsonism Relat Disord ; 21(5): 449-54, 2015 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25737205

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients with Parkinson's disease have higher hospital admission rates than the general population. We examined the reasons for admission, length of stay, costs, and in-hospital mortality in a national sample of Parkinson's disease patients. METHODS: We used hospital admission data from the English Hospital Episodes Statistics database (2009-2013). Patients with Parkinson's disease or Parkinson's disease dementia and aged over 35 years were compared to all other admissions, excluding the above, with the same age criteria. We examined reasons for admissions (ICD-10), length of stay and in-hospital mortality. We used indirect standardisation and Poisson modelling to derive proportional ratios adjusting for age group and sex. RESULTS: There were 324,055 Parkinson's disease admissions in 182,859 patients over 4 years which included 232,905 non-elective admissions (72%). This resulted in expenditure of £907 million (£777 million for non-elective admissions). The main reasons for admission were pneumonia (13.5%), motor decline (9.4%), urinary tract infection (9.2%), and hip fractures (4.3%). These conditions occurred 1.5 to 2.6 times more frequently in patients than controls. Patients with Parkinson's disease were almost twice as likely to stay in hospital for more than 3 months (ratio 1.90, 95% CI 1.83, 1.97) and even more likely die in hospital (ratio 2.46, 95% CI 2.42, 2.49). CONCLUSIONS: Parkinson's disease patients in England have higher rates of emergency admissions with longer hospital stays, higher costs and in-hospital mortality. Urgent attention should be given to developing cost-effective interventions to reduce the burden of hospitalisation for patients, carers and healthcare systems.


Assuntos
Efeitos Psicossociais da Doença , Bases de Dados Factuais/tendências , Mortalidade Hospitalar/tendências , Hospitalização/tendências , Doença de Parkinson/economia , Doença de Parkinson/mortalidade , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos Transversais , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Doença de Parkinson/diagnóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos
15.
Parkinsonism Relat Disord ; 21(3): 243-8, 2015 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25577023

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on the association between exposure to hydrocarbons and the risk of Parkinson's disease (PD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarise the epidemiological evidence and included a new large case-control study. METHODS: Data were extracted following a predefined protocol. Risk estimates regarding the association between hydrocarbon exposure and PD were consolidated to produce a summary odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and p-value. In our case-control study, 1463 PD patients and 685 controls were recruited from clinical trials and completed a structured questionnaire describing their previous working exposure to hydrocarbons and other demographic measures. The association between exposure to hydrocarbons and risk of PD was evaluated using logistic regression. RESULTS: The systematic search identified 13 case-control studies matching the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis included 3020 PD cases and 6494 controls. The summary OR was 1.32 (95% CI 1.08-1.62, p = 0.006) for hydrocarbon exposure (ever versus never). In the PD GEN study, occupational exposure to hydrocarbons significantly increased the risk of PD (OR = 1.61; 95% CI 1.10-2.36, p = 0.014), and risk dose-dependently increased for subjects exposed greater than 10 years compared to subjects never exposed (OR = 2.19; 95% CI 1.13-4.26, p = 0.021). The addition of PD GEN data increased the total numbers to 4483 PD cases and 7179 controls and strengthened the significant association (summary OR = 1.36; 95% CI 1.13-1.63, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review supports a positive association between hydrocarbon exposure and PD. Data from prospective studies are required to reinforce the relationship between hydrocarbon exposure and PD.


Assuntos
Hidrocarbonetos/efeitos adversos , Exposição Ocupacional/efeitos adversos , Doença de Parkinson/epidemiologia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino
16.
BMJ Open ; 4(12): e006434, 2014 Dec 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25500772

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: This priority setting partnership was commissioned by Parkinson's UK to encourage people with direct and personal experience of the condition to work together to identify and prioritise the top 10 evidential uncertainties that impact on everyday clinical practice for the management of Parkinson's disease (PD). SETTING: The UK. PARTICIPANTS: Anyone with experience of PD including: people with Parkinson's (PwP), carers, family and friends, healthcare and social care professionals. Non-clinical researchers and employees of pharmaceutical or medical devices companies were excluded. 1000 participants (60% PwP) provided ideas on research uncertainties, 475 (72% PwP) initially prioritised them and 27 (37% PwP) stakeholders agreed a final top 10. METHODS: Using a modified nominal group technique, participants were surveyed to identify what issues for the management of PD needed research. Unique research questions unanswered by current evidence were identified and participants were asked to identify their top 10 research priorities from this list. The top 26 uncertainties were presented to a consensus meeting with key stakeholders to agree the top 10 research priorities. RESULTS: 1000 participants provided 4100 responses, which contained 94 unique unanswered research questions that were initially prioritised by 475 participants. A consensus meeting with 27 stakeholders agreed the top 10 research priorities. The overarching research aspiration was an effective cure for PD. The top 10 research priorities for PD management included the need to address motor symptoms (balance and falls, and fine motor control), non-motor symptoms (sleep and urinary dysfunction), mental health issues (stress and anxiety, dementia and mild cognitive impairments), side effects of medications (dyskinesia) and the need to develop interventions specific to the phenotypes of PD and better monitoring methods. CONCLUSIONS: These research priorities identify crucial gaps in the existing evidence to address everyday practicalities in the management of the complexities of PD.


Assuntos
Assistência à Saúde , Gerenciamento Clínico , Prioridades em Saúde , Doença de Parkinson/terapia , Pesquisa , Cuidadores , Consenso , Coleta de Dados , Família , Amigos , Pessoal de Saúde , Necessidades e Demandas de Serviços de Saúde , Humanos , Doença de Parkinson/complicações , Pacientes , Reino Unido
17.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (6): CD002815, 2014 Jun 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24936965

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Despite medical therapies and surgical interventions for Parkinson's disease (PD), patients develop progressive disability. The role of physiotherapy is to maximise functional ability and minimise secondary complications through movement rehabilitation within a context of education and support for the whole person. The overall aim is to optimise independence, safety and wellbeing, thereby enhancing quality of life. Trials have shown that physiotherapy has short-term benefits in PD. However, which physiotherapy intervention is most effective remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of one physiotherapy intervention compared with a second approach in patients with PD. SEARCH METHODS: Relevant trials were identified by electronic searches of numerous literature databases (for example MEDLINE, EMBASE) and trial registers, plus handsearching of major journals, abstract books, conference proceedings and reference lists of retrieved publications. The literature search included trials published up to the end of January 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of one physiotherapy intervention versus another physiotherapy intervention in patients with PD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were abstracted independently from each paper by two authors. Trials were classified into the following intervention comparisons: general physiotherapy, exercise, treadmill training, cueing, dance and martial arts. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 43 trials were identified with 1673 participants. All trials used small patient numbers (average trial size of 39 participants); the methods of randomisation and concealment of allocation were poor or not stated in most trials. Blinded assessors were used in just over half of the trials and only 10 stated that they used intention-to-treat analysis.A wide variety of validated and customised outcome measures were used to assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions. The most frequently reported physiotherapy outcomes were gait speed and timed up and go, in 19 and 15 trials respectively. Only five of the 43 trials reported data on falls (12%). The motor subscales of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale and Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 were the most commonly reported clinician-rated disability and patient-rated quality of life outcome measures, used in 22 and 13 trials respectively. The content and delivery of the physiotherapy interventions varied widely in the trials included within this review, so no quantitative meta-analysis could be performed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Considering the small number of participants examined, the methodological flaws in many of the studies, the possibility of publication bias, and the variety of interventions, formal comparison of the different physiotherapy techniques could not be performed. There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the effectiveness of one physiotherapy intervention over another in PD.This review shows that a wide range of physiotherapy interventions to treat PD have been tested . There is a need for more specific trials with improved treatment strategies to underpin the most appropriate choice of physiotherapy intervention and the outcomes measured.


Assuntos
Doença de Parkinson/reabilitação , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Marcha/fisiologia , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
18.
Lancet ; 384(9949): 1196-205, 2014 Sep 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24928805

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Whether initial treatment for Parkinson's disease should consist of levodopa, dopamine agonists, or monoamine oxidase type B inhibitors (MAOBI) is uncertain. We aimed to establish which of these three classes of drug, as initial treatment, provides the most effective long-term control of symptoms and best quality of life for people with early Parkinson's disease. METHODS: In this pragmatic, open-label randomised trial, patients newly diagnosed with Parkinson's disease were randomly assigned (by telephone call to a central office; 1:1:1) between levodopa-sparing therapy (dopamine agonists or MAOBI) and levodopa alone. Patients and investigators were not masked to group assignment. Primary outcomes were the mobility dimension on the 39-item patient-rated Parkinson's disease questionnaire (PDQ-39) quality-of-life scale (range 0-100 with six points defined as the minimally important difference) and cost-effectiveness. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN69812316. FINDINGS: Between Nov 9, 2000, and Dec 22, 2009, 1620 patients were assigned to study groups (528 to levodopa, 632 to dopamine agonist, 460 to MAOBI). With 3-year median follow-up, PDQ-39 mobility scores averaged 1·8 points (95% CI 0·5-3·0, p=0·005) better in patients randomly assigned to levodopa than those assigned to levodopa-sparing therapy, with no increase or attrition of benefit during 7 years' observation. PDQ-39 mobility scores were 1·4 points (95% CI 0·0-2·9, p=0·05) better in patients allocated MAOBI than in those allocated dopamine agonists. EQ-5D utility scores averaged 0·03 (95% CI 0·01-0·05; p=0·0002) better with levodopa than with levodopa-sparing therapy; rates of dementia (hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·61-1·08, p=0·14), admissions to institutions (0·86, 0·63-1·18; p=0·4), and death (0·85, 0·69-1·06, p=0·17) were not significantly different, but the upper CIs precluded any substantial increase with levodopa compared with levodopa-sparing therapy. 179 (28%) of 632 patients allocated dopamine agonists and 104 (23%) of 460 patients allocated MAOBI discontinued allocated treatment because of side-effects compared with 11 (2%) of 528 patients allocated levodopa (p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Very small but persistent benefits are shown for patient-rated mobility scores when treatment is initiated with levodopa compared with levodopa-sparing therapy. MAOBI as initial levodopa-sparing therapy was at least as effective as dopamine agonists. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme and UK Department of Health.


Assuntos
Antiparkinsonianos/uso terapêutico , Agonistas de Dopamina/uso terapêutico , Levodopa/uso terapêutico , Inibidores da Monoaminoxidase/uso terapêutico , Doença de Parkinson/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Animais , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Monoaminoxidase/efeitos dos fármacos , Resultado do Tratamento
19.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (9): CD002817, 2013 Sep 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24018704

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Despite medical therapies and surgical interventions for Parkinson's disease (PD), patients develop progressive disability. Physiotherapy aims to maximise functional ability and minimise secondary complications through movement rehabilitation within a context of education and support for the whole person. The overall aim is to optimise independence, safety, and well-being, thereby enhancing quality of life. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy intervention compared with no intervention in patients with PD. SEARCH METHODS: We identified relevant trials by conducting electronic searches of numerous literature databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE) and trial registers, and by handsearching major journals, abstract books, conference proceedings, and reference lists of retrieved publications. The literature search included trials published up to the end of January 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of physiotherapy intervention versus no physiotherapy intervention in patients with PD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data from each article. We used standard meta-analysis methods to assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy intervention compared with no physiotherapy intervention. Trials were classified into the following intervention comparisons: general physiotherapy, exercise, treadmill training, cueing, dance, and martial arts. We used tests for heterogeneity to assess for differences in treatment effect across these different physiotherapy interventions. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 39 trials with 1827 participants. We considered the trials to be at a mixed risk of bias as the result of unreported allocation concealment and probable detection bias. Compared with no intervention, physiotherapy significantly improved the gait outcomes of speed (mean difference 0.04 m/s, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.06, P = 0.0002); two- or six-minute walk test (13.37 m, 95% CI 0.55 to 26.20, P = 0.04) and Freezing of Gait questionnaire (-1.41, 95% CI -2.63 to -0.19, P = 0.02); functional mobility and balance outcomes of Timed Up & Go test (-0.63 s, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.21, P = 0.003), Functional Reach Test (2.16 cm, 95% CI 0.89 to 3.43, P = 0.0008), and Berg Balance Scale (3.71 points, 95% CI 2.30 to 5.11, P < 0.00001); and clinician-rated disability using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) (total -6.15 points, 95% CI-8.57 to -3.73, P < 0.00001; activities of daily living: -1.36, 95% CI -2.41 to -0.30, P = 0.01; and motor: -5.01, 95% CI -6.30 to -3.72, P < 0.00001). No difference between arms was noted in falls (Falls Efficacy Scale: -1.91 points, 95% CI -4.76 to 0.94, P = 0.19) or patient-rated quality of life (PDQ-39 Summary Index: -0.38 points, 95% CI -2.58 to 1.81, P = 0.73). One study reported that adverse events were rare; no other studies reported data on this outcome. Indirect comparisons of the different physiotherapy interventions revealed no evidence that the treatment effect differed across physiotherapy interventions for any of the outcomes assessed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Benefit for physiotherapy was found in most outcomes over the short term (i.e. < 3 months) but was significant only for speed, two- or six-minute walk test, Freezing of Gait questionnaire, Timed Up & Go, Functional Reach Test, Berg Balance Scale, and clinician-rated UPDRS. Most of the observed differences between treatments were small. However, for some outcomes (e.g. speed, Berg Balance Scale, UPDRS), the differences observed were at, or approaching, what are considered minimal clinically important changes. These benefits should be interpreted with caution because the quality of most of the included trials was not high. Variation in measurements of outcome between studies meant that our analyses include a small proportion of the participants recruited.This review illustrates that a wide range of approaches are employed by physiotherapists to treat patients with PD. However, no evidence of differences in treatment effect was noted between the different types of physiotherapy interventions being used, although this was based on indirect comparisons. A consensus menu of 'best practice' physiotherapy is needed, as are large, well-designed randomised controlled trials undertaken to demonstrate the longer-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness of 'best practice' physiotherapy in PD.


Assuntos
Doença de Parkinson/reabilitação , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Atividades Cotidianas , Marcha , Humanos , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Caminhada , Conduta Expectante
20.
J Neurol ; 260(11): 2701-14, 2013 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23287972

RESUMO

Motor complications in Parkinson's disease (PD) result from the short half-life and irregular plasma fluctuations of oral levodopa. When strategies of providing more continuous dopaminergic stimulation by adjusting oral medication fail, patients may be candidates for one of three device-aided therapies: deep brain stimulation (DBS), continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion, or continuous duodenal/jejunal levodopa/carbidopa pump infusion (DLI). These therapies differ in their invasiveness, side-effect profile, and the need for nursing care. So far, very few comparative studies have evaluated the efficacy of the three device-aided therapies for specific motor problems in advanced PD. As a result, neurologists currently lack guidance as to which therapy could be most appropriate for a particular PD patient. A group of experts knowledgeable in all three therapies reviewed the currently available literature for each treatment and identified variables of clinical relevance for choosing one of the three options such as type of motor problems, age, and cognitive and psychiatric status. For each scenario, pragmatic and (if available) evidence-based recommendations are provided as to which patients could be candidates for either DBS, DLI, or subcutaneous apomorphine.


Assuntos
Antiparkinsonianos/administração & dosagem , Estimulação Encefálica Profunda , Doença de Parkinson/terapia , Apomorfina/administração & dosagem , Carbidopa/administração & dosagem , Vias de Administração de Medicamentos , Prática Clínica Baseada em Evidências , Humanos , Levodopa/administração & dosagem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA