Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a chronic disease manifested principally by motor signs and symptoms, but with frequent neuropsychological alterations.ObjectivesTo study the relationship between clinical and cognitive aspects and the perception of quality of life (QOL) in PD patients.MethodsTwenty consecutive patients (13 men) with idiopathic PD (mean age: 64.5y), mean disease time of 7.8 years and at stages 1-3 according to the modified Hoehn and Yahr staging scale (HYS), all outpatients from the Neurology Department of the Celso Pierro General and Maternity Hospital (PUC-Campinas), were analyzed. The following were applied: a clinical-neurological assessment, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), standard neuropsychological battery of the CERAD (Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) and a QOL questionnaire (Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire - PDQ-39). Statistical analysis was carried out at a significance level of pResultsOn the PDQ-39 under the sections total, mobility and activities of daily living, and the items motor compromise (HYS) and language of the MMSE were predictors of worse QOL. Verbal fluency was a factor for emotional well-being on the PDQ-39, whereas higher scores for HAM-D and worse performance on the item attention and calculation of the MMSE were associated with worse QOL in the social support section. Total score on the MMSE and educational level were QOL factors in cognition.ConclusionsThe findings of the present study suggest that clinical, cognitive, motor or other depression-related factors contribute differently to the domains of QOL.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.