NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundParkinson's disease (PD) is a chronic and multifaceted disease with a variety of motor and non-motor symptoms. The safe symptomatic drug therapy of often multimorbid patients places enormous demands on the competence, communication and coordination of the treating physicians, particularly in the outpatient sector.ObjectivesThis study aimed to explore aspects of drug safety and interdisciplinary communication in the outpatient sector of PD patients.MethodsA semistructured questionnaire was designed addressing various aspects of drug safety in the outpatient setting. The questionnaire was sent to a total of 1,002 general practitioners (GP) and 1,005 neurologists (NEU).ResultsOne hundred and forty-seven NEU and eighty-four GP answered the questionnaire. Overall, NEU treated more PD patients, while GP cared for more geriatric PD patients, especially outside of the outpatient clinic (home visits, nursing homes). Regarding the execution of recommended laboratory or technical check-ups, as well as the prescription of new medications, neither a formal agreement nor structured communication existed. Merely the identification of potential drug-drug interactions (DDI) was regularly carried out by both professions.ConclusionThe inadequate interdisciplinary communication hampers therapy safety and consequently the safety of the vulnerable PD patient group. For this reason, standardized and comprehensive communication mechanisms are urgently needed. Solution approaches may include an individual protected digital health record or integrated treatment networks comprising all professionals participating in the management of PD patients.
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.