SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Sarcopenia, malnutrition, and fatigue in de Novo Parkinson's disease- support for early rehabilitation.

Neurol Sci · 2025-06-24

DOI: 10.1007/s10072-025-08317-1PMID: 40553423

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

ObjectiveSarcopenia (loss of muscle strength/mass) reduces physical performance (walking, strength, mobility) and is common in Parkinson's disease (PD), but data on newly diagnosed, untreated patients ("de novo") are scarce. Fatigue is frequent in PD and linked to physical decline and malnutrition, key sarcopenia risk factors. We aimed to describe sarcopenia prevalence, malnutrition risk, and fatigue in de novo PD and explore differences based on fatigue presence.MethodsParticipants (n = 49) underwent physical tests [chair stand test (CST), hand grip strength, gait speed, Timed Up and Go test (TUG)] to assess sarcopenia. Malnutrition risk and fatigue were assessed using the Nutrition Form version 2 (MEONF-II) and the 16-item Parkinson's Disease Fatigue Scale (PFS-16).ResultsTwenty (40.8%) showed probable sarcopenia. Eight (16%) had fatigue, and 8 (19%) were at risk of malnutrition. No significant differences in sarcopenia indicators were found between groups, but those with fatigue had lower physical performance (CST, p = 0.033; TUG, p = 0.011), slower gait speed (p = 0.050), and poorer appetite (p = 0.003).ConclusionA substantial proportion of de novo PD presented probable sarcopenia. Fatigue was associated with poorer physical performance and appetite but not sarcopenia. Whether fatigue increases risk of future malnutrition/sarcopenia is unclear due to cross-sectional study design. It should be further explored using a longitudinal study design.

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.