SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Treatment initiation for parkinson's disease in Australia 2013-2018: a nation-wide study.

BMC Geriatr · 2022-06-03

DOI: 10.1186/s12877-022-03095-3PMID: 35658842

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

BackgroundGuidelines highlight the importance of an individualized approach to treatment initiation for Parkinson's disease. Our aim was to investigate initiation of anti-Parkinson medication in Australia from 2013-2018, and to determine factors predicting choice of initial treatment.MethodsCohort of new-users (N = 4,887) of anti-Parkinson medication aged ≥ 40 years were identified from a 10% random representative sample of national medication dispensing data from July-2013 to June-2018. Changes in treatment initiation were examined across the whole cohort and stratified by age and sex.ResultsTreatment initiation was most frequent with levodopa followed by non-ergot dopamine agonists (DAs) and anticholinergics. Two thirds initiated with levodopa across the study period. Initiation with non-ergot DAs increased from 22 to 27% (rate ratio, RR 1.23, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.02-1.47) and initiation with anticholinergics decreased from 6.9% to 2.4% (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.21-0.55) from 2013-2018. Among persons aged ≥ 65 years, one third of women and one fourth of men initiated on levodopa. Among women aged ConclusionsTreatment initiation with levodopa was most frequent among persons aged ≥ 65 years, consistent with current guidelines. Whilst the value of levodopa sparing strategies is unclear, treatment initiation with DA has become increasingly common relative to levodopa among women but not among men aged < 65 years.

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.