SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Predictors of Global Non-Motor Symptoms Burden Progression in Parkinson's Disease. Results from the COPPADIS Cohort at 2-Year Follow-Up.

J Pers Med · 2021-06-30

DOI: 10.3390/jpm11070626PMID: 34209166

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Background and Objective: Non-motor symptoms (NMS) progress in different ways between Parkinson's disease (PD) patients. The aim of the present study was to (1) analyze the change in global NMS burden in a PD cohort after a 2-year follow-up, (2) to compare the changes with a control group, and (3) to identify predictors of global NMS burden progression in the PD group. Material and Methods: PD patients and controls, recruited from 35 centers of Spain from the COPPADIS cohort from January 2016 to November 2017, were followed-up with after 2 years. The Non-Motor Symptoms Scale (NMSS) was administered at baseline (V0) and at 24 months ± 1 month (V2). Linear regression models were used for determining predictive factors of global NMS burden progression (NMSS total score change from V0 to V2 as dependent variable). Results: After the 2-year follow-up, the mean NMS burden (NMSS total score) significantly increased in PD patients by 18.8% (from 45.08 ± 37.62 to 53.55 ± 42.28; p p = 0.428; N = 122; 49.5% males, mean age 60.99 ± 8.32) (p Conclusions: Global NMS burden demonstrates short-term progression in PD patients but not in controls and identifies worsening sleep problems and neuropsychiatric symptoms as significant independent predictors of this NMS progression.

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.