SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · PMC

PEOPLE LIVING WITH PARKINSON DISEASE WITH AND WITHOUT FREEZING: DIFFERENCES USING THE NEURO-QOL MEASUREMENT SYSTEM

Innovation in aging · 2019-11-01

Open accessAbstractOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Abstract Parkinson disease (PD) is the second most common neurodegenerative disease and approximately half of those diagnosed with PD will experience freezing of gait (FOG). FOG is a severe motor disturbance that prevents stepping despite the intention to do so and may be associated with anxiety, decreased cognitive functioning, depression, and poorer quality of life. In this study, we administered the short-form Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders (Neuro-QOL) measurement system to 43 people with PD (28 non-freezers and 15 freezers) and determined freezing status using the New Freezing of Gait-Questionnaire. Freezers had greater motor severity as measured with the MDS-UPDRS-III (p =.003) and poorer balance using the Mini-BESTest (p = .017). Data from the Neuro-QOL battery indicated freezers had greater difficulty with Lower Extremity Function (p = .019) and Upper Extremity Function (p = .027). Freezers also had poorer scores on the Positive Affect and Well-Being (p = .005), Satisfaction with Social Roles and Activities (p = .005), and Stigma (p = .026) scales, but less difficulty on the Communication scale (p = .005) than non-freezers. There were no differences between freezers and non-freezers on the Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities, Anxiety, Cognitive Function, Depression, Emotional and Behavioral Dyscontrol, Fatigue, or Sleep Disturbance scales. These findings suggest freezers are less likely to have a positive outlook and satisfaction with their daily lives in combination with poorer functioning. Interventions that target freezing with the potential to improve functioning may result in better quality of life among freezers.

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.