4.7 Article

Duodenal levodopa/carbidopa infusion therapy in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease leads to improvement in caregivers' stress and burden

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
卷 19, 期 9, 页码 1261-1265

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2011.03630.x

关键词

activities of daily living; caregiver burden; caregiver stress; duodenal levodopa infusion; Parkinson's disease; quality of life

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Continuous duodenal levodopa infusion (DLI) is an effective therapy that improves quality of life (QoL) in advanced Parkinsons disease (PD). However, the impact of DLI on caregivers stress and burden has not been reported. Methods: We evaluated prospectively open-label seven advanced PD patients (65.7 +/- 9.6 years, 71.4% men) treated with DLI. Schwab & England Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADLS), 39-item Parkinsons disease QoL Questionnaire Summary Index score (PDQ-39SI), Zarit Caregiver Burden Interview (ZCBI), and Caregiver Strain Index (CSI) were used. Comparisons were made between scores obtained at baseline and those at a mean follow-up of 31.4 +/- 7.9 months (range, 2342). Results: In patients, mean +/- SD ADLS was increased from 50 +/- 8.2 to 80 +/- 11.6 (P = 0.014), and mean +/- SD PDQ-39SI was decreased from 53.7 +/- 11.9 to 33.6 +/- 12.8 (P = 0.018). In caregivers, ZCBI decreased from 43 +/- 13.3 to 20.7 +/- 12.1 (P = 0.018) and CSI from 6.3 +/- 2.5 to 1.6 +/- 0.9 (P = 0.018). At baseline, 57.1% of caregivers reported moderate to severe burden (ZCBI 4188) compared to 28.6% at the end of the follow-up (P = 0.015); at that time, no caregiver reported high level of stress (CSI = 7) compared to 57.1% at baseline (P = 0.046). There were significant correlations between ZCBI and CSI improvement (r = 0.813, P = 0.026), ZCBI and PDQ-39SI (r = 0.875, P = 0.01), and ZCBI and ADLS (r = 0.813, P = 0.026). Conclusions: Duodenal levodopa infusion-related clinical improvement in patients with advanced PD leads to substantial reductions in caregivers stress and burden.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据