SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Trends in Parkinson's disease medication prescribing patterns in the UK: An interrupted time series analysis (2019-2024).

PLoS One · 2025-05-23

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0324999PMID: 40408537

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

This study aimed to examine prescribing trends for Parkinson's disease (PD) medications in the United Kingdom from 2019 to 2024, focusing on the impact of guidelines from the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) on the use of levodopa and dopamine agonists (DAs). A repeated cross-sectional design was employed, using publicly available data to assess prescribing patterns across the four UK countries. An interrupted time series analysis with linear regression was performed to identify trends, comparing regions with England as the reference point. Levodopa remained the most prescribed PD medication across all UK regions, as revealed by the analysis. In England, levodopa prescriptions increased significantly after the introduction of AAN guidelines, while other regions displayed more stable trends. Northern Ireland exhibited a distinct pattern, with DAs prescribed more frequently than levodopa. The findings also indicated that Scotland and Wales were less responsive to AAN guidance. This study highlights the influence of clinical guidelines on PD prescribing practices in the UK, with regional variations suggesting possible demographic or healthcare system factors. Further research is required to understand these disparities and their implications for PD management.

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.