4.5 Article

Restless legs syndrome affects sleep in de novo Parkinson's disease patients

Journal

MEDICINE
Volume 102, Issue 44, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035551

Keywords

Parkinson's disease; restless legs syndrome; sleep

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Restless legs syndrome (RLS) affects clinical factors, particularly sleep quality and non-motor symptoms, in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). It is important to note that RLS is more prevalent in de novo PD patients and mainly impacts sleep disturbances.
Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is common in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and can affect the motor symptoms and non-motor symptoms (NMSs) of PD patients. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical factors affected by RLS in patients with PD. We included 369 de novo PD patients. RLS was assessed via face-to-face interviews and the motor symptoms and NMSs of the patients were assessed using relevant scales. RLS frequency in the patients was 12.2% (45/369). PD patients with RLS (PD-RLS) exhibited a greater global Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) score than those without RLS (PD-No RLS). PD-RLS exhibited significantly greater scores in the daytime dysfunction and sleep disturbances components of the PSQI than PD-No RLS. PD-RLS exhibited a significantly greater score in the cardiovascular, sleep/fatigue, and attention/memory subdomain of the Non-Motor Symptoms Scale than PD-No RLS. The International RLS Study Group rating scale score was significantly related to PSQI components scores in the sleep disturbances, sleep latency, habitual sleep efficiency, and subjective sleep quality. RLS frequency in de novo PD patients is higher than that in the general population, and the main NMS affected by RLS in these patients is sleep disturbances. Therefore, it is necessary to manage RLS in PD patients with sleep disturbances.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available