[Driving ability in Parkinson's disease]. / Fahreignung bei Morbus Parkinson.

About 60 % of all patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) and about 50 % of PD patients with deep brain stimulation (DBS) in possession of a driving license are active car-drivers. Parkinson patients, however, often display physical and/or psychological weaknesses that can lead to loss of or reduced driving ability. Driving capability can also be affected by Parkinson medication. The attending physician is therefore obliged to advise his patients regarding their ability to be in command of a vehicle. This however can prove difficult in practice. On the one hand, there is no standardised predictive test battery to evaluate driving capability and on the other, levels of motor impairment do not correlate sufficiently with driving skills. This article will provide an overview of motor and non-motor symptoms that affect general and/or Parkinson's disease-related driving capability and which criteria demonstrate a temporary or permanent inability to drive. Furthermore, we will highlight which neuropsychological investigations are beneficial and how PD patients with DBS should be evaluated and subsequently advised regarding their driving fitness.

Impaired learning of punishments in Parkinson's disease with and without impulse control disorder.

To document specific learning mechanisms in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) with and without impulse control disorder (ICD). Thirty-two PD patients receiving dopamine replacement therapy (DRT) were investigated. Sixteen were diagnosed with ICD (ICD + ) and 16 PD patients matched for levodopa equivalence dosage, and DRT duration and severity of disease did not show impulsive behavior (non-ICD). Short-term learning of inhibitory control was assessed by an experimental procedure which was intended to mimic everyday life. Correct inhibition especially, had to be learned without reward (passive avoidance), and the failure to inhibit a response was punished (punishment learning). Results were compared to 16 healthy controls (HC) matched for age and sex. In ICD+ patients within-session learning of non-rewarded inhibition was at chance levels. Whereas healthy controls rapidly developed behavioral inhibition, non-ICD patients were also significantly impaired compared to HC, but gradually developed some degree of control. Both patient groups showed significantly decreased learning if the failure to withhold a response was punished. PD patients receiving DRT show impaired ability to acquire both punishment learning and passive avoidance learning, irrespective of whether or not ICD was developed. In ICD + PD patients, behavioral inhibition is nearly absent. Results demonstrate that by means of subtle learning paradigms it is possible to identify PD-DRT patients who show subtle alterations of punishment learning. This may be a behavioral measure for the identification of PD patients who are prone to develop ICD if DRT is continued.

Fear of Progression is Determined by Anxiety and Self-Efficacy but not Disease-Specific Parameters in Patients with Parkinson's Disease: Preliminary Data from a Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Fear of progression (FoP) is a reactive, conscious concern about chronic disease progression and its consequences which may limit quality of life substantially. Only one study has examined FoP in Parkinson's disease (PD), showing the second highest FoP scores among chronic diseases. OBJECTIVE: To examine FoP prevalence and to exploratorily analyze determinants of FoP in PD. METHODS: Within a multicenter cross-sectional study, 120 PD inpatients (age: 64.45±9.20; 60.8% male; UPDRS-III: 28.86±16.12) were examined with the FoP questionnaire (FoP-Q; max. 20 points). Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis examined sociodemographic, clinical, and (neuro-) psychological determinants of FoP. RESULTS: With a mean FoP-Q score of 8.08±2.17, 63.0% of the patients were classified with moderate FoP and 17.6% with dysfunctional (i.e., severe) FoP. The highest scores were shown for the subscale 'loss of autonomy'. Increased levels of anxiety, less self-efficacy, female gender, current employment, and lower health literacy were identified as significant determinants associated with FoP. CONCLUSION: With more than 80% of patients showing moderate to dysfunctional FoP, it must be regarded as a frequent symptom in PD, which needs to be further understood and addressed in clinical practice. Clinical parameters like PD duration and severity were no determinants for FoP, indicating that FoP awareness must be considered by professionals at all disease stages.

Evaluation of Individualized Multi-Disciplinary Inpatient Treatment for Functional Movement Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Functional movement disorders (FMD) are associated with considerable morbidity and impairment of quality of life. Specialized treatment is scarce and data on efficacy of different therapies are limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a multi-modal inpatient treatment program for patients with FMD. METHODS: Thirty-one patients with FMD were analyzed before (t1) and after multi-modal inpatient treatment (t2) by a blinded video rating using the Psychogenic Movement Disorder Rating Scale (PMDRS), the simplified Functional Movement Disorder Rating Scale (S-FMDRS), and the Clinical Global Impression Scale of Severity (CGI-S), as well as patients' self-rating. In 23 out of 31 patients a 5 months follow-up investigation was performed (t3). Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Friedman test were used for rating scale and self-rating comparisons over time. Spearman correlation was used for correlation of symptom improvement and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Video rating revealed significant reduction of scores after therapy (median PMDRS t1 = 24, t2 = 8, P = 0.0006; S-FMDRS t1 = 11, t2 = 4, P = 0.008; CGI-S t1 = 4, t2 = 3, P = 0.000136) with sustained score decrease in follow-up evaluations (PMDRS t1 = 31, t2 = 8, t3 = 7, P = 0.000032; S-FMDRS t1 = 12, t2 = 4, t3 = 3, P = 0.000888; CGI-S t1 = 4, t2 = 3, t3 = 3, P = 0.000032). Patients reported a stable reduction of symptoms in the self-rating (CGI-S t1 = 5, t2 = 4, t3 = 4, P = 0.016). Age correlated with treatment response with older patients showing better improvement, but disease duration did not correlate with outcome. Patients who suffered from physical trauma, sexual or physical abuse had smaller score reductions. CONCLUSION: Blinded video and self-rating assessment showed significant score reduction in patients with FMD after an individualized interdisciplinary inpatient intervention.