SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Prevalence and functional impact of parkinsonian signs in older adults from the Good Aging in Skåne study.

Parkinsonism Relat Disord · 2023-04-25

DOI: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2023.105416PMID: 37130449

Check source for accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

IntroductionMild parkinsonian signs (MPS) have been characterized by several definitions, using the motor part of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). We aimed to investigate the prevalence of MPS and their association with functional level and comorbidities in the oldest old.MethodCommunity-dwelling older adults (n = 559, median age 85, range 80-102 years) were examined regarding MPS, possible parkinsonism (PP) and subthreshold parkinsonism (SP) according to four previously used definitions and concerning the impact of parkinsonian signs on cognitive, physical, and autonomic function. MPS, PP and SP are different terms describing a very similar phenomenon and there is no gradation between these. In two of the four definitions more advanced symptoms were categorized as parkinsonism.ResultsMedian UPDRS score in the whole study group was 10 points (range: 0-58) and was predominated by bradykinesia. MPS/PP/SP were present in 17-85%, and parkinsonism in 33-71% of the cohort. Independently of age and gender, MPS/PP/SP and especially parkinsonism, were associated with a higher risk of fear of falling and accomplished falls, with lower: cognition, ADL, physical activity and quality of life, and with urinary incontinence, obstipation and orthostatic intolerance.ConclusionsIn a population of older adults above 80 years, MPS are highly prevalent as well as more advanced symptoms defined as parkinsonism, and only 9-17% of the cohort is symptom-free. Predominance of bradykinesia in the oldest old might indicate a need for revision of MPS definitions to improve their sensibility.

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.