Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundDeep brain stimulation (DBS) is a well-established procedure for treating Parkinson's disease (PD). Although its mechanisms of action are still unclear, improvements in motor symptoms and reductions in medication side effects can be achieved for a significant proportion of patients, with consequent enhancement of quality of life.ObjectiveTo investigate the impact of DBS on the quality of life of PD patients.MethodsThis was a retrospective longitudinal study with collection of historical data in a neurosurgery center, from June 2019 to December 2020. The sample was obtained according to convenience, and the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) III and IV, Trail-Making Test and Verbal Fluency Test were used.ResultsData were collected from 17 patients (13 with subthalamic nucleus DBS and 4 with globus pallidus pars interna DBS). Significant improvement (p=0.008) on the UPDRS III was observed in comparing the preoperative without DBS with the postoperative with DBS. About 47.0% of the patients showed post-surgical improvement in QoL (p=0.29). Thirteen patients were able to complete part A of the Trail-Making Test and four of these also completed part B. Almost 60% of the patients scored sufficiently on the semantic test, whereas only 11.8% scored sufficiently on the orthographic evaluation. No association between implant site and test performance could be traced.ConclusionsImprovements in quality of life and motor function were observed in the majority of the patients enrolled. Despite the limitations of this study, DBS strongly benefits a significant proportion of PD patients when well indicated.
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.