NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundIn Germany, multidisciplinary care for people with Parkinson's disease (PwP, PD) is mainly provided in the inpatient setting. Differences in user groups between established and effective interventions like PD Multimodal Complex Therapy (PD-MCT) and Geriatric Complex Therapy (GCT) have not been investigated.MethodsThis real-world bicenter prospective observational study involved PwP undergoing 14-day inpatient multidisciplinary therapies at two German university hospitals providing either PD-MCT or GCT. Demographic and clinical variables were recorded before and device-based gait variables before and after therapy. Non-parametric and parametric tests including ANCOVA with age as covariate were conducted to compare groups at baseline, and an exploratory binomial logistic regression (LR) to identify predictors of 'therapy response' concerning gait speed.ResultsBetween 09/2017 and 09/2022, 100 (41% female) and 102 (34.3% female) PwP received GCT or PD-MCT, with significant (p 2 = 0.312) and revealed lower fear of falling and gait speed as predictors of 'therapy response', independent of therapy type, age, sex, disease duration or stage.ConclusionGCT users show higher age and severity, particularly concerning mobility impairments independent of age. It is unclear if, on a national level, actual PD-MCT/GCT user groups align with intended target groups. Health insurance data analyses could help refine clinical recommendations and public health policies for more targeted multidisciplinary PD care.Trial registrationPark Move Study: DRKS, DRKS00020948. Registered 30 March 2020-retrospectively registered, https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00020948/details.
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.