SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Improving patient-centred care for persons with Parkinson's: Qualitative interviews with care partners about their engagement in discussions of "off" periods.

Health Expect · 2019-04-12

DOI: 10.1111/hex.12884PMID: 30977262

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

ObjectiveThis study explored how care partners (CPs) of persons with Parkinson's (PwP) are engaged in discussions of "off" symptoms.MethodsDuring qualitative interviews, CPs of PwP sampled by convenience through the Michael J Fox Foundation online clinical trial matching service were asked to describe their familiarity with "off" symptoms, how "off" symptoms were discussed with clinicians, and the impact of "off" symptoms on them. Data were analysed using constant comparative technique by all members of the research team.ResultsA total of 20 CPs were interviewed. Compared with PwP, they were more likely to describe "off" symptoms to clinicians. CPs identified important aspects of patient-centred care for PD: establishing a therapeutic relationship, soliciting and actively listening to information about symptoms, and providing self-management support to both PwP and CPs. CPs said that clinicians did not always engage CPs, ask about "off" symptoms or provide self-management guidance, limiting their ability to function as caregivers.ConclusionBy not engaging and educating CPs, "off" symptoms may not be identified or addressed, leading to suboptimal medical management and quality of life for PwP. These findings must be confirmed on a broader scale through ongoing research but suggest the potential need for interventions targeted at clinicians and at CPs to promote patient-centred care for PwP.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.