SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Knowledge, attitude, and practice of healthcare professionals toward cognitive dysfunction in Parkinson's disease and cognitive rehabilitation.

BMC Med Educ · 2024-01-04

DOI: 10.1186/s12909-023-04989-5PMID: 38178059

Open accessresearch-article; Multicenter Study; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundTo investigate the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) of healthcare professionals regarding cognitive dysfunction and cognitive rehabilitation in Parkinson's disease (PD).MethodsThis multicenter, cross-sectional survey enrolled physicians and nurses in 10 hospitals between October 2022 and November 2022. A self-administered questionnaire was developed to collect the demographic information of the participants and their knowledge, attitude, and practice toward cognitive dysfunction in PD and cognitive rehabilitation.ResultsThis study enrolled 224 physicians and 229 nurses. The knowledge, attitude, and practice scores were 12.57 ± 3.76 (total score: 22), 29.10 ± 3.71 (total score: 32), and 21.07 ± 8.03 (total score: 28) among physicians, and 9.97 ± 4.70 (total score: 22), 25.27 ± 8.96 (total score: 32), and 25.27 ± 8.96 (total score: 28) among nurses. Among physicians, the knowledge scores (OR = 4.23, 95%CI: 2.36-7.58, P ConclusionsPhysicians and nurses have insufficient knowledge, favorable attitudes, and active practice regarding cognitive dysfunction and cognitive rehabilitation in PD. This study identified gaps in KAP and suggested education activities to improve the KAP toward cognitive dysfunction in PD.

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.