Are Patients Ready for "EARLYSTIM"? Attitudes towards Deep Brain Stimulation among Female and Male Patients with Moderately Advanced Parkinson's Disease

Opportunities and obstacles in non-invasive brain stimulation

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a complex and multifaceted approach to modulating brain activity and holds the potential for broad accessibility. This work discusses the mechanisms of the four distinct approaches to modulating brain activity non-invasively: electrical currents, magnetic fields, light, and ultrasound. We examine the dual stochastic and deterministic nature of brain activity and its implications for NIBS, highlighting the challenges posed by inter-individual variability, nebulous dose-response relationships, potential biases and neuroanatomical heterogeneity. Looking forward, we propose five areas of opportunity for future research: closed-loop stimulation, consistent stimulation of the intended target region, reducing bias, multimodal approaches, and strategies to address low sample sizes.

Gender discrepancies and differences in motor and non-motor symptoms, cognition, and psychological outcomes in the treatment of Parkinson's disease with subthalamic deep brain stimulation

Available data suggest that there may be gender differences in the effect of STN-DBS in the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD). The aim of this study was to review data on gender discrepancies and gender differences in clinical outcomes in PD patients treated with deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus (STN-DBS). Included were original studies that specifically examined gender discrepancies or gender differences in PD patients with STN-DBS. Men receive more DBS than women, for various indications. The decision-making process for DBS in women compared to men is more influenced by personal preferences and external factors. Motor symptoms improve in both genders, but bradykinesia improves more in men. The postoperative reduction of the levodopa equivalent daily dose seems to be more pronounced in men. Men show more cognitive deterioration and less improvement than women after STN-DBS. Women show more depressive symptoms before surgery, but they improve similarly to men. Men show more improvement in impulsivity and less decrease in impulsive behaviour symptoms than women. Anxiety and personality traits remain unchanged in both genders. Voice quality improves more in men and deteriorates less often than in women. Men gain fat-free mass and fat mass, but women only gain fat mass. Regarding sexual function the evidence is inconsistent. More urinary symptoms improve in women than in men. Pain and restless leg syndrome seems to improve more in men. Regarding quality of life, the evidence seems to be inconsistent, and activities of daily living seems to improve in both genders. Better prospective controlled studies, focusing directly on gender differences in PD patients treated with STN-DBS, are needed to better explain gender differences in STN-DBS for PD.

Access to device-aided therapies in advanced Parkinson's disease: navigating clinician biases, patient preference, and prognostic uncertainty

Device-aided therapies (DAT), which include deep brain stimulation and pump-based continuous dopaminergic stimulation with either levodopa or apomorphine, are among the major advances in the clinical management of Parkinson's disease (PD). Although DAT are being increasingly offered earlier in the disease course, their classical indication remains advanced PD. Theoretically, every patient should be offered transition to DAT when faced with refractory motor and nonmotor fluctuations and functional decline. Worldwide clinical reality is far from these ideal, and, therefore, question the "real-world" equal opportunity of access to DAT for PD patients with advanced PD-even within a single health care system. Differences in access to care, referral pattern (timing and frequency), as well as physician biases (unconscious/implicit or conscious/explicit bias), and patients' preferences or health-seeking behaviour are to be considered. Compared to DBS, little information is available concerning infusion therapies, as well as neurologists' and patients' attitudes towards them. This viewpoint aims to be thought-provoking and to assist clinicians in moving through the process of DAT selection, by including in their decision algorithm their own biases, patient perspective, ethical concerns as well as the current unknowns surrounding PD prognosis and DAT-related long-term side effects for a given patient.

Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson’s Disease: Why Earlier Use Makes Shared Decision Making Important

Introduction

As deep brain stimulation (DBS) has shifted to being used earlier during Parkinson’s disease (PD), data is lacking regarding patient specific attitudes, preferences, and factors which may influence the timing of and decision to proceed with DBS in the United States. This study aims to identify and compare attitudes and preferences regarding the earlier use of DBS in Parkinson’s patients who have and have not undergone DBS.

Methods

We developed an online survey concerning attitudes about DBS and its timing in PD. The survey was distributed nationally in the United States via the Michael J. Fox Foundation Trial Finder, the American Parkinson Disease Association flyers, and as a link on the Parkinson Alliance website. Differences in responses between PD DBS and non-DBS patients were assessed.

Results

A total of 445 patients with PD met eligibility criteria for the survey of which 160 self-identified as having undergone DBS. Fifty-five percent (n = 124) of non-DBS patients believed that DBS for PD should only be considered after all medication options have been tried. Patients favoring early DBS had fewer concerns regarding the surgery than those favoring later DBS.

Conclusion

Our findings highlight a variety of important considerations and concerns patients have regarding DBS and its timing. These viewpoints are important aspects of shared decision-making, as they help to identify patients’ preferences, values, and goals, which should enable providers to better navigate, with their patients, the decision path for therapeutic options to consider.

Women in Neuromodulation: Innovative Contributions to Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery

Stereotactic neurosurgery emerged in the mid-20th century following the development of a stereotactic frame by Spiegel and Wycis. Historically women were underrepresented in clinical and academic neurosurgery. There is still a significant deficit of female scientists in this field. This article aims to demonstrate the career and scientific work of some of the most important women who contributed to the development of stereotactic and functional neurosurgery. Exceptional women from all over the world, represented in this review, assisted the evolution of modern stereotactic and functional neurosurgery as neurosurgeons, neuropathologists, neurologists, neurophysiologists and occupational therapists. Fortunately, we could conclude that in the last two decades the number of female researchers has increased significantly.

How Parkinson's patients in the USA perceive deep brain stimulation in the 21st century: Results of a nationwide survey

Research on attitudes regarding the use and timing of deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been mostly qualitative to this date. In this study, we aim to examine attitudes and perceptions about the use and timing of DBS in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) who have not had DBS. We designed an online survey comprising Likert-type, multiple choice, and rank-order questions and distributed it to PD patients. We recruited participants via flyers, the Michael J. Fox Foundation Trial Finder, and the Parkinson Alliance website. We analyzed considerations for choosing or rejecting DBS and when participants would consider such a decision to be premature. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, including a multinomial logistic regression model. Among the 285 participants who reported not having undergone DBS, the most frequent concerns were related to the efficacy of DBS and not having exhausted medication alternatives. DBS was viewed as less convenient, effective, and safe when PD symptoms were still manageable by medication. Our regression model suggests that having fewer concerns over technical problems was a positive predictor of preferring early DBS, while concerns over DBS interfering with friendships and relationships was a negative predictor. Our results suggest that patients with PD who have not undergone DBS have a wide variety of attitudes regarding DBS and its timing. Given the increasing number of therapeutic options for PD, future work should compare perceptions and preferences regarding different PD treatment modalities to provide the best counseling for patients regarding their therapeutic options.

Capturing Initial Understanding and Impressions of Surgical Therapy for Parkinson's Disease

Background: Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) is an underutilized surgical therapy for Parkinson's Disease (PD). Both physician and patient hesitancies have been described as potential barriers to DBS, but the specifics of patient perceptions of DBS have not been well-characterized in the general PD population. Objective: To characterize the understanding and impressions of surgical therapy in PD patients prior to formal surgical evaluation. Methods: A 30-question survey assessing impressions of surgical therapy for PD and understanding of DBS for PD was administered to PD patients seen at an urban movement disorders clinic. Results: One hundred and two patients completed the survey. When asked if they would undergo a hypothetical risk-free, curative brain surgery for PD, 98 patients responded "yes." Patients were more agreeable to "reversible," "minimally-invasive," and "incisionless" surgery. 51.2% thought DBS is an "effective" treatment for PD, 76.6% thought it was "invasive," and 18.3% thought it was "reversible." 45.2% reported fear of being awake during DBS surgery. Regarding costs, 52.4% were concerned that DBS was "very expensive" or "not covered by insurance." Initial source of information and perceived treatment effectiveness were not associated with concerns about DBS effectiveness or threats to normality. Negative perceptions of past surgery were associated with concerns about DBS altering mood and personality. Conclusion: Overall, patients expressed concerns regarding procedural efficacy, invasiveness, cost, and irreversibility-independent of the original source of information. Future studies are required to allow us to better understand the impact of these initial findings on DBS hesitancy and underutilization.

Attitudes toward use and timing of deep brain stimulation: a patient's with DBS perspective

OBJECTIVE

To guide responsive policy and better understand factors that might shape patients' decisions to have DBS earlier, we explore perspectives and attitudes toward earlier deep brain stimulation (DBS) of Parkinson disease (PD) patients with DBS.

INTRODUCTION

Before the US Food and Drug Administration released its change of indication for the use of DBS for PD, several groups had performed DBS earlier in disease course.

METHODS

We designed an online survey comprising Likert-type, multiple choice, and rank-order questions and distributed it to PD patients. We analyzed patient considerations for having chosen DBS and for choosing or rejecting to have DBS earlier, as well as factors potentially shaping perspectives around DBS and its timing. Data was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.

RESULTS

Among the 160 participants in the sample, the most important consideration for choosing DBS was the possibility of better symptomatic control compared to medication alone. The most important consideration for delaying DBS was possible ineffectiveness. 41.3 % (n = 66) of respondents supported earlier DBS use, 38.8 % (n = 62) did not, and the remainder (n = 30) were uncertain. Patients who supported earlier DBS use cited the possibility of better symptomatic control than with medication alone, while those who did not support earlier use felt that medication options should be exhausted first.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that there are multiple factors shaping patient perceptions around earlier DBS implantation. Future work should compare perceptions before and after DBS implantation, as well as pair perceptions with clinical outcomes.

Knowledge, Attitude, and Perceptions about Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease: Observations from a Single Indian Center

Objective

Willingness to undergo deep brain stimulation (DBS) among patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) and their overall satisfaction with the procedure is highly dependent upon expectations, which are based on the core concepts of knowledge, attitude and perceptions. The present study aims to evaluate these factors in patients and caregivers with PD from a single tertiary care hospital in India.

Methods

A structured questionnaire designed to assess the knowledge, attitude and perceptions about DBS in PD was administered to 400 patients with PD and their caregivers.

Results

A very small proportion of patients and caregivers were aware of DBS. Even those who claimed to be aware of DBS were inadequately informed and had incorrect knowledge, which led to wrong attitudes and perceptions.

Conclusion

There are very significant knowledge gaps and misconceptions regarding DBS among patients with PD and caregivers. Adequate and appropriate education is necessary to clarify these misconceptions to avoid the development of unrealistic expectations and poor satisfaction.

Interpretation of health-related quality of life outcomes in Parkinson's disease from the EARLYSTIM Study

The EARLYSTIM Study compared deep brain stimulation (DBS) with best medical treatment (BMT) over 2-years, showing a between-group difference of 8.0 from baseline in favor of DBS in health-related quality of life (HRQoL), measured with the PDQ-39 SI (summary index). This study obtained complementary information about the importance of the change in HRQoL as measured by the PDQ-39, using anchor-based (Patient Global Impression of Change, PGIC) and distribution-based techniques (magnitude of change, effect size, thresholds, distribution of benefit) applied to the EARLYSTIM study data. Anchor-based techniques showed a difference follow-up-baseline for patients who reported "minimal improvement" of -5.8 [-9.9, -1.6] (mean [95%CI]) in the DBS group vs -2.9 [-9.0, 3.1] in the BMT group. As the vast majority (80.8%) of DBS patients reported "much or very much improvement", this difference was explored for the latter group and amounted to -8.7 for the DBS group and -6.5 in the BMT group. Distribution-based techniques that analyzed the relative change and treatment effect size showed a moderate benefit of the DBS on the HRQoL, whereas a slight worsening was observed in the BMT group. The change in the DBS group (-7.8) was higher than the MIC (Minimally Important Change) estimated value (-5.8 by the anchor; -6.3 by triangulation of thresholds), but not in the BMT (0.2 vs. -3.0 to -5.4, respectively). Almost 90% of the patients in the DBS group declared some improvement (58.3% and 56.7% beyond the estimated MIC), which was significantly different from the BMT group whose proportions were 32.0% and 30.3%, respectively. The number needed to treat to improve ≥1 MIC by DBS vs BMT was 3.8. Change in depression, disability and pain influenced the improvement of the DBS group. DBS improved HRQoL in a high proportion of patients to a significant and moderate degree, at 2 years follow-up.

Perspectives on Deep Brain Stimulation and Its Earlier Use for Parkinson's Disease: A Qualitative Study of US Patients

Background: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is being used earlier than was previously the case in the disease progression in people with Parkinson’s disease (PD). To explore preferences about the timing of DBS, we asked PD patients with DBS whether they would have preferred the implantation procedure to have occurred earlier after diagnosis. Methods: Twenty Michigan-based patients were interviewed about both their experiences with DBS as well as their attitudes regarding the possible earlier use of DBS. We used a structured interview, with both closed and open-ended questions. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a mixed-methods approach. Results: We found that the majority of our participants (72%) had high overall satisfaction with DBS in addressing motor symptoms (mean of 7.5/10) and quality of life (mean of 8.25/10). Participants were mixed about whether they would have undergone DBS earlier than they did, with five participants being unsure and the remaining nearly equally divided between yes and no. Conclusion: Patient attitudes on the early use of DBS were mixed. Our results suggest that while patients were grateful for improvements experienced with DBS, they would not necessarily have endorsed its implementation earlier in their disease progression. Larger studies are needed to further examine our findings.

Patient's lived experience with DBS between medical research and care: some legal implications

In the past 50 years, an ethical-legal boundary has been drawn between treatment and research. It is based on the reasoning that the two activities pursue different purposes. Treatment is aimed at achieving optimal therapeutic benefits for the individual patient, whereas the goal of scientific research is to increase knowledge, in the public interest. From this viewpoint, the patient's experience should be clearly distinguished from that of a participant in a clinical trial. On this premise, two parallel and mutually exclusive regimes have been established. Yet in the case of deep brain stimulation (DBS), this presentation is a poor fit, for both the patient's lived experience and medical practice and research. The frictions may be explained by the specificities of the treatment (including surgery and medical devices) and of the pathologies concerned (chronic and evolutive), and by the characteristics of the medical team implementing the treatment. These particularities challenge the dominant frame of reference in medical bioethics and cause difficulties for the current legal framework in fulfilling its dual role: to protect patients while supporting the development of innovative treatments. The dominant model is still the clinical trial for medication safety and legal requirements of drug market regulation. However, DBS forces us to reflect on a medical device that is permanently implanted in the brain by highly specialized multi-disciplinary neurosurgical teams, for the treatment of chronic evolutive diseases. These devices demand fine-tuning on a case-by-case basis and there is still a lot to discover about why DBS is effective (or not). As a result, the wall between treatment and research is osmotic: many discoveries are made incidentally, in the course of treatment. The following study begins with these observations, and suggests that we review legal provisions (especially in French and United States law) so that they are better adapted to the first-person needs and experience of the patient undergoing brain stimulation.

An update on best practice of deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease

During the last 30 years, deep brain stimulation (DBS) has evolved into the clinical standard of care as a highly effective treatment for advanced Parkinson’s disease. Careful patient selection, an individualized anatomical target localization and meticulous evaluation of stimulation parameters for chronic DBS are crucial requirements to achieve optimal results. Current hardware-related advances allow for a more focused, individualized stimulation and hence may help to achieve optimal clinical results. However, current advances also increase the degrees of freedom for DBS programming and therefore challenge the skills of healthcare providers. This review gives an overview of the clinical effects of DBS, the criteria for patient, target, and device selection, and finally, offers strategies for a structured programming approach.