SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Practical use of apomorphine infusion in Parkinson's disease: lessons from the TOLEDO study and clinical experience.

J Neural Transm (Vienna) · 2023-09-01

DOI: 10.1007/s00702-023-02686-7PMID: 37658155

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

Research overview

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

Subcutaneous apomorphine infusion is a device-aided therapy for Parkinson's disease that can be considered when motor fluctuations become persistent and are no longer adequately controlled by oral/transdermal medication. Apomorphine infusion is less invasive than enteral levodopa, deep brain stimulation or focused ultrasound, and is often indicated even when neurosurgical approaches are contraindicated. This article aims to provide practical guidance for doctors and nurses initiating and treating patients with apomorphine infusion, and is based on both trial data and clinical experience from movement disorders specialists. A post hoc analysis of data from the TOLEDO randomized clinical trial of apomorphine infusion was conducted along with an analysis of 'real world' experience from 13 movement disorders specialists using a questionnaire that focused on starting patients on apomorphine infusion. Practical guidelines for starting treatment with apomorphine infusion are provided taking into consideration the regional disparities in healthcare. Apomorphine infusion is straightforward to administer but to be successful it requires concordance from the patient and family, and clinical support from an experienced team of doctors and nurses, particularly in the early months of treatment.

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.