SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Diagnostic Delays in Parkinson's Disease in Thailand: Clinical Pitfalls and Health System Barriers.

Life (Basel) · 2025-09-25

DOI: 10.3390/life15101513PMID: 41157185

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

BackgroundParkinson's disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder in which early diagnosis improves quality of life and reduces disability. However, diagnostic delays remain common, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This study investigated clinical and system-level factors contributing to diagnostic delay in Thailand.MethodsA retrospective chart review was conducted on patients newly diagnosed with PD at Thammasat University Hospital between June 2020 and June 2024. Demographic, clinical, and healthcare access data were analyzed. Diagnostic intervals were defined as onset-to-visit (OTV), visit-to-diagnosis (VTD), and onset-to-diagnosis (OTD). Age-at-onset groups included early-onset Parkinson's disease (EOPD, ResultsOf 1093 patients screened, 109 newly diagnosed PD cases met the inclusion criteria. The median OTV was 360 days, and the median VTD was 10 days. Tremor was the most frequent initial symptom (75%). Patients with higher education and extended family support sought care earlier, whereas those under the Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS) experienced longer OTD durations (median, 541 vs. 181 days in privately insured patients). More than half of patients were initially misdiagnosed, especially when first evaluated by non-neurologists.ConclusionsDiagnostic delay in Thai PD patients stems mainly from late help-seeking and inequities in healthcare access. Addressing these gaps requires public awareness, physician training, streamlined UCS referral pathways, and adoption of biomarker-supported digital tools to ensure earlier and more equitable diagnosis.

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.