Group patient visits for Parkinson disease: a randomized feasibility trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Group patient visits are medical appointments shared among patients with a common medical condition. This care delivery method has demonstrated benefits for individuals with chronic conditions but has not been evaluated for Parkinson disease (PD).Methods
We conducted a 12-month, randomized trial of group patient visits vs usual (one-on-one) care for patients with PD. Visits were led by one of 3 study physicians, included patients and caregivers, and lasted approximately 90 minutes. Those receiving group visits had 4 sessions over 12 months. The primary outcome measure was feasibility as measured by the ability to recruit participants and by the proportion of participants who completed the study. The primary efficacy outcome was quality of life as measured by the PD Questionnaire-39.Results
Thirty patients and 27 caregivers enrolled in the study. Thirteen of the 15 patients randomized to group patient visits and 14 of the 15 randomized to usual care completed the study. Quality of life measured 12 months after baseline between the 2 groups was not different (25.9 points for group patient visits vs 26.0 points for usual care; p = 0.99).Conclusions
Group patient visits may be a feasible means of providing care to individuals with PD and may offer an alternative or complementary method of care delivery for some patients and physicians.Classification of evidence
This study provides Class II evidence that group patient visits did not improve quality of life for individuals with PD over a 1-year period.
SUBMITTER: Dorsey ER
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3100128 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Comparative studies of exercise interventions for people with Parkinson disease (PD) rarely considered how one should deliver the intervention. The objective of this study was to compare the success of exercise when administered by (1) home exercise program, (2) individualized physical therapy, or (3) a group class. We examined if common comorbidities associated with PD impacted success of each intervention.Fifty-eight people (age = 63.9 ± 8 years) with PD participated. People were randomized into (1) home exercise program, (2) individual physical therapy, or (3) group class intervention. All arms were standardized and based on the Agility Boot Camp exercise program for PD, 3 times per week for 4 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the 7-item Physical Performance Test. Other measures of balance, gait, mobility, quality of life, balance confidence, depressions, apathy, self-efficacy and UPDRS-Motor, and activity of daily living scores were included.Only the individual group significantly improved in the Physical Performance Test. The individual exercise showed the most improvements in functional and balance measures, whereas the group class showed the most improvements in gait. The home exercise program improved the least across all outcomes. Several factors effected success, particularly for the home group.An unsupervised, home exercise program is the least effective way to deliver exercise to people with PD, and individual and group exercises have differing benefits. Furthermore, people with PD who also have other comorbidities did better in a program directly supervised by a physical therapist.Video Abstract available for additional insights from the authors (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A112).
| S-EPMC4772717 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We sought to characterize recommendations and feedback of patients with Parkinson disease, each offered a free telemedicine consultation with a specialist. Visits consisted of history, neurologic examination, and recommendations. Midway through the program, patients were asked to complete an online satisfaction survey. From August 2012 to May 2013, 55 patients in 5 states (mean age 67.8 years) participated, with 80% of visits conducted from their home. Patients with Parkinson disease were recommended to exercise (86%), change current medication (63%), and add new medication (53%). Thirty-three of 35 consecutive patients completed a survey. Patient satisfaction exceeded 90% for virtually all aspects of the visit measured. Providing care to patients in their homes via telemedicine is feasible, results in changes to care, and is well-received.
| S-EPMC4001180 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Previous small-scale studies have demonstrated the feasibility of providing remote specialty care via virtual visits. We assessed the feasibility and benefits of a one-time consultation between a remote Parkinson Disease (PD) specialist and an individual with PD at home on a larger scale. METHODS:We conducted a multicenter noncontrolled cohort of virtual visits administered over videoconferencing between remote PD specialists and individuals with PD in their home. Specialists performed a patient history and a PD-specific physical examination and provided recommendations to patients and their local physicians. The primary outcome measures were feasibility, as measured by the proportion of visits completed as scheduled, and the 6-month change in quality of life, as measured by the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39. Additional outcomes included satisfaction with visits and interest in future virtual visits. RESULTS:A total of 277 participants from 5 states enrolled, 258 participants completed virtual visits with 14 different physicians, and 91% of visits were completed as scheduled. No improvement in quality of life was observed at 6 months (0.4-point improvement; 95% confidence interval -1.5 to 0.6; p = 0.39). Overall satisfaction with virtual visits was high among physicians (94% satisfied or very satisfied) and patients (94% satisfied or very satisfied), and 74% of participants were interested in receiving future care via virtual visits. CONCLUSIONS:Providing specialty care remotely into the homes of individuals with PD is feasible, but a one-time visit did not improve quality of life. Satisfaction with the visits was high among physicians and patients, who were interested in receiving such care in the future. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE:This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with PD, remote specialty care is feasible but does not improve quality of life. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER:NCT02144220.
| S-EPMC5566796 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMobile health, predominantly wearable technology and mobile apps, have been considered in Parkinson disease to provide valuable ecological data between face-to-face visits and improve monitoring of motor symptoms remotely.ObjectiveWe explored the feasibility of using a technology-based mHealth platform comprising a smartphone in combination with a smartwatch and a pair of smart insoles, described in this study as the PD_manager system, to collect clinically meaningful data. We also explored outcomes and disease-related factors that are important determinants to establish feasibility. Finally, we further validated a tremor evaluation method with data collected while patients performed their daily activities.MethodsPD_manager trial was an open-label parallel group randomized study.The mHealth platform consists of a wristband, a pair of sensor insoles, a smartphone (with dedicated mobile Android apps) and a knowledge platform serving as the cloud backend. Compliance was assessed with statistical analysis and the factors affecting it using appropriate regression analysis. The correlation of the scores of our previous algorithm for tremor evaluation and the respective Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale estimations by clinicians were explored.ResultsOf the 75 study participants, 65 (87%) completed the protocol. They used the PD_manager system for a median 11.57 (SD 3.15) days. Regression analysis suggests that the main factor associated with high use was caregivers' burden. Motor Aspects of Experiences of Daily Living and patients' self-rated health status also influence the system's use. Our algorithm provided clinically meaningful data for the detection and evaluation of tremor.ConclusionsWe found that PD patients, regardless of their demographics and disease characteristics, used the system for 11 to 14 days. The study further supports that mHealth can be an effective tool for the ecologically valid, passive, unobtrusive monitoring and evaluation of symptoms. Future studies will be required to demonstrate that an mHealth platform can improve disease management and care.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN17396879; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN17396879.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1186/s13063-018-2767-4.
| S-EPMC7367523 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveEpidemiologic studies consistently link caffeine, a nonselective adenosine antagonist, to lower risk of Parkinson disease (PD). However, the symptomatic effects of caffeine in PD have not been adequately evaluated.MethodsWe conducted a 6-week randomized controlled trial of caffeine in PD to assess effects upon daytime somnolence, motor severity, and other nonmotor features. Patients with PD with daytime somnolence (Epworth >10) were given caffeine 100 mg twice daily ×3 weeks, then 200 mg twice daily ×3 weeks, or matching placebo. The primary outcome was the Epworth Sleepiness Scale score. Secondary outcomes included motor severity, sleep markers, fatigue, depression, and quality of life. Effects of caffeine were analyzed with Bayesian hierarchical models, adjusting for study site, baseline scores, age, and sex.ResultsOf 61 patients, 31 were randomized to placebo and 30 to caffeine. On the primary intention-to-treat analysis, caffeine resulted in a nonsignificant reduction in Epworth Sleepiness Scale score (-1.71 points; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.57, 0.13). However, somnolence improved on the Clinical Global Impression of Change (+0.64; 0.16, 1.13, intention-to-treat), with significant reduction in Epworth Sleepiness Scale score on per-protocol analysis (-1.97; -3.87, -0.05). Caffeine reduced the total Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale score (-4.69 points; -7.7, -1.6) and the objective motor component (-3.15 points; -5.50, -0.83). Other than modest improvement in global health measures, there were no changes in quality of life, depression, or sleep quality. Adverse events were comparable in caffeine and placebo groups.ConclusionsCaffeine provided only equivocal borderline improvement in excessive somnolence in PD, but improved objective motor measures. These potential motor benefits suggest that a larger long-term trial of caffeine is warranted.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class I evidence that caffeine, up to 200 mg BID for 6 weeks, had no significant benefit on excessive daytime sleepiness in patients with PD.
| S-EPMC3414662 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundStudies suggest that dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers may be associated with reduced risk for Parkinson disease (PD).ObjectiveTo assess the effect of isradipine, a dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker, on the rate of clinical progression of PD.DesignMulticenter, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02168842).Setting57 Parkinson Study Group sites in North America.ParticipantsPatients with early-stage PD (duration <3 years) who were not taking dopaminergic medications at enrollment.Intervention5 mg of immediate-release isradipine twice daily or placebo for 36 months.MeasurementsThe primary outcome was change in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) parts I to III score measured in the antiparkinson medication "ON" state between baseline and 36 months. Secondary outcomes included time to initiation and use of antiparkinson medications, time to onset of motor complications, change in nonmotor disability, and quality-of-life measures.Results336 patients were randomly assigned (mean age, 62 years [SD, 9]; 68% men; disease duration, 0.9 year [SD, 0.7]; mean UPDRS part I to III score, 23.1 [SD, 8.6]); 95% of patients completed the study. Adjusted least-squares mean changes in total UPDRS score in the antiparkinson medication ON state over 36 months for isradipine and placebo recipients were 2.99 (95% CI, 0.95 to 5.03) points versus 3.26 (CI, 1.25 to 5.26) points, respectively, with a treatment effect of -0.27 (CI, -3.02 to 2.48) point (P = 0.85). Statistical adjustment for antiparkinson medication use did not change the findings. Secondary outcomes showed no effect of isradipine treatment. The most common adverse effects of isradipine were edema and dizziness.LimitationThe isradipine dose may have been insufficient to engage the target calcium channels associated with neuroprotective effects.ConclusionLong-term treatment with immediate-release isradipine did not slow the clinical progression of early-stage PD.Primary funding sourceNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
| S-EPMC7465126 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To determine whether falls can be prevented with minimally supervised exercise targeting potentially remediable fall risk factors, i.e., poor balance, reduced leg muscle strength, and freezing of gait, in people with Parkinson disease.Two hundred thirty-one people with Parkinson disease were randomized into exercise or usual-care control groups. Exercises were practiced for 40 to 60 minutes, 3 times weekly for 6 months. Primary outcomes were fall rates and proportion of fallers during the intervention period. Secondary outcomes were physical (balance, mobility, freezing of gait, habitual physical activity), psychological (fear of falling, affect), and quality-of-life measures.There was no significant difference between groups in the rate of falls (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-1.17, p = 0.18) or proportion of fallers (p = 0.45). Preplanned subgroup analysis revealed a significant interaction for disease severity (p < 0.001). In the lower disease severity subgroup, there were fewer falls in the exercise group compared with controls (IRR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.15-0.62, p < 0.001), while in the higher disease severity subgroup, there was a trend toward more falls in the exercise group (IRR = 1.61, 95% CI 0.86-3.03, p = 0.13). Postintervention, the exercise group scored significantly (p < 0.05) better than controls on the Short Physical Performance Battery, sit-to-stand, fear of falling, affect, and quality of life, after adjusting for baseline performance.An exercise program targeting balance, leg strength, and freezing of gait did not reduce falls but improved physical and psychological health. Falls were reduced in people with milder disease but not in those with more severe Parkinson disease.This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with Parkinson disease, a minimally supervised exercise program does not reduce fall risk. This study lacked the precision to exclude a moderate reduction or modest increase in fall risk from exercise.Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12608000303347).
| S-EPMC4335992 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is a paucity of therapies for gait impairment in Parkinson disease (PD). Open-label studies have suggested improved gait after treatment with methylphenidate (MPD).To evaluate the efficacy of MPD for the treatment of gait impairment in PD.Twenty-seven subjects with PD and moderate gait impairment were screened for this 6-month placebo-controlled, double-blind study. Subjects were randomly assigned to MPD (maximum, up to 80 mg/day) or placebo for 12 weeks and crossed over after a 3-week washout. The primary outcome measure was change in a gait composite score (stride length + velocity) between groups at 4 and 12 weeks. Secondary outcome measures included changes in motor function, as measured by the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (FOGQ), number of gait-diary freezing episodes, and measures of depression, sleepiness, and quality of life. Three-factor repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to measure changes between groups.Twenty-three eligible subjects with PD were randomized and 17 completed the trial. There was no change in the gait composite score or treatment or time effect for any of the variables. Treatment effect was not modified by state or study visit. Although there was a trend for reduced frequency of freezing and shuffling per diary, the FOGQ and UPDRS scores worsened in the MPD group compared to placebo. There was a marginal improvement in some measures of depression.MPD did not improve gait and tended to worsen measures of motor function, sleepiness, and quality of life.This study provides Class III evidence for the lack of benefit of MPD on PD-associated gait impairment.NCT00526630.
| S-EPMC3068005 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The burden of neurological disorders is increasing, but access to care is limited. Providing specialty care to patients via telemedicine could help alleviate this growing problem.To evaluate the feasibility, effectiveness, and economic benefits of using web-based videoconferencing (telemedicine) to provide specialty care to patients with Parkinson disease in their homes.A 7-month, 2-center, randomized controlled clinical trial.Patients' homes and outpatient clinics at 2 academic medical centers.Twenty patients with Parkinson disease with Internet access at home.Care from a specialist delivered remotely at home or in person in the clinic.The primary outcome variable was feasibility, as measured by the percentage of telemedicine visits completed as scheduled. Secondary outcome measures included clinical benefit, as measured by the 39-item Parkinson Disease Questionnaire, and economic value, as measured by time and travel.Twenty participants enrolled in the study and were randomly assigned to telemedicine (n = 9) or in-person care (n = 11). Of the 27 scheduled telemedicine visits, 25 (93%) were completed, and of the 33 scheduled in-person visits, 30 (91%) were completed (P = .99). In this small study, the change in quality of life did not differ for those randomly assigned to telemedicine compared with those randomly assigned to in-person care (4.0-point improvement vs 6.4-point improvement; P = .61). Compared with in-person visits, each telemedicine visit saved participants, on average, 100 miles of travel and 3 hours of time.Using web-based videoconferencing to provide specialty care at home is feasible, provides value to patients, and may offer similar clinical benefit to that of in-person care. Larger studies are needed to determine whether the clinical benefits are indeed comparable to those of in-person care and whether the results observed are generalizable.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01476306.
| S-EPMC3791511 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether providing remote neurologic care into the homes of people with Parkinson disease (PD) is feasible, beneficial, and valuable.MethodsIn a 1-year randomized controlled trial, we compared usual care to usual care supplemented by 4 virtual visits via video conferencing from a remote specialist into patients' homes. Primary outcome measures were feasibility, as measured by the proportion who completed at least one virtual visit and the proportion of virtual visits completed on time; and efficacy, as measured by the change in the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39, a quality of life scale. Secondary outcomes included quality of care, caregiver burden, and time and travel savings.ResultsA total of 927 individuals indicated interest, 210 were enrolled, and 195 were randomized. Participants had recently seen a specialist (73%) and were largely college-educated (73%) and white (96%). Ninety-five (98% of the intervention group) completed at least one virtual visit, and 91% of 388 virtual visits were completed. Quality of life did not improve in those receiving virtual house calls (0.3 points worse on a 100-point scale; 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.0 to 2.7 points; p = 0.78) nor did quality of care or caregiver burden. Each virtual house call saved patients a median of 88 minutes (95% CI 70-120; p < 0.0001) and 38 miles per visit (95% CI 36-56; p < 0.0001).ConclusionsProviding remote neurologic care directly into the homes of people with PD was feasible and was neither more nor less efficacious than usual in-person care. Virtual house calls generated great interest and provided substantial convenience.Clinicaltrialsgov identifierNCT02038959.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class III evidence that for patients with PD, virtual house calls from a neurologist are feasible and do not significantly change quality of life compared to in-person visits. The study is rated Class III because it was not possible to mask patients to visit type.
| S-EPMC5595275 | biostudies-literature