Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundPeople with a chronic condition such as Parkinson's disease (PD) struggle with acceptance and finding meaning in life. Consciousness coaching could be a valuable addition in addressing these issues.ObjectiveWe aim to evaluate the user experiences and potential effectiveness of consciousness coaching for people with PD (PwPD).MethodsWe performed a pilot randomized controlled trial including PwPD in Hoehn & Yahr stage 1-3. People with cognitive impairments, severe psychiatric disorders, or those who did not have a clear issue to address with consciousness coaching, were excluded. PwPD were randomly allocated to either receiving 6 months of consciousness coaching in addition to usual care or to usual care alone. To explore experiences we performed semi-structured qualitative interviews with all PwPD in the intervention group. Potential effects were explored using questionnaires on quality of life, activities of daily life, self-management and non-motor symptoms at baseline and after 6 months.ResultsWe included 39 PwPD, 19 participants in the intervention group and 20 in the control group. Based on the interviews, we identified a number of themes and codes. In general PwPD experienced consciousness coaching as confronting but supportive in reaching their goals and in taking more responsibility for their lives. Quantitatively, we did not find a difference between groups for any of the outcomes.ConclusionsConsciousness coaching was considered valuable by most participants in this study and may be an interesting addition to PD treatment. We did not find any effects of the intervention on PD symptoms or quality of life.
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.