1
|
Gage H, Grainger L, Ting S, Williams P, Chorley C, Carey G, Borg N, Bryan K, Castleton B, Trend P, Kaye J, Jordan J, Wade D. Specialist rehabilitation for people with Parkinson’s disease in the community: a randomised controlled trial. HEALTH SERVICES AND DELIVERY RESEARCH 2014. [DOI: 10.3310/hsdr02510] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BackgroundMultidisciplinary rehabilitation is recommended for Parkinson’s disease, but evidence suggests that benefit is not sustained.Objectives(1) Implement a specialist domiciliary rehabilitation service for people with Parkinson’s and carers. (2) Provide continuing support from trained care assistants to half receiving the rehabilitation. (3) Evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the service, and the value added by the care assistants, compared with usual care. (4) Assess the costs of the interventions. (5) Investigate the acceptability of the service. (6) Deliver guidance for commissioners.DesignPragmatic three-parallel group randomised controlled trial.SettingCommunity, county of Surrey, England, 2010–11.ParticipantsPeople with Parkinson’s, at all stages of the disease, and live-in carers.InterventionsGroups A and B received specialist rehabilitation from a multidisciplinary team (MDT) – comprising Parkinson’s nurse specialists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and speech and language therapists – delivered at home, tailored to individual needs, over 6 weeks (about 9 hours’ individual therapy per patient). In addition to the MDT, participants in group B received ongoing support for a further 4 months from a care assistant trained in Parkinson’s (PCA), embedded in the MDT (1 hour per week per patient). Participants in control group (C) received care as usual (no co-ordinated MDT or ongoing support).Main outcome measuresFollow-up assessments were conducted in participants’ homes at 6, 24 and 36 weeks after baseline. Primary outcomes: Self-Assessment Parkinson’s Disease Disability Scale (patients); the Modified Caregiver Strain Index (carers). Secondary outcomes included: for patients, disease-specific and generic health-related quality of life, psychological well-being, self-efficacy, mobility, falls and speech; for carers, strain, stress, health-related quality of life, psychological well-being and functioning.ResultsA total of 306 people with Parkinson’s (and 182 live-in carers) were randomised [group A,n = 102 (n = 61); group B,n = 101 (n = 60); group C,n = 103 (n = 61)], of whom 269 (155) were analysed at baseline, pilot cohort excluded. Attrition occurred at all stages. A per-protocol analysis [people with Parkinson’s,n = 227 (live-in carers,n = 125)] [group A,n = 75 (n = 45); group B,n = 69 (n = 37); group C,n = 83 (n = 43)] showed that, at the end of the MDT intervention, people with Parkinson’s in groups A and B, compared with group C, had reduced anxiety (p = 0.02); their carers had improved psychological well-being (p = 0.02). People with Parkinson’s in groups A and B also had marginally reduced disability (primary outcome,p = 0.09), and improved non-motor symptoms (p = 0.06) and health-related quality of life (p = 0.07), compared with C. There were significant differences in change scores between week 6 (end of MDT) and week 24 (end of PCA for group B) in favour of group B, owing to worsening in group A (no PCA support) in posture (p = 0.001); non-motor symptoms (p = 0.05); health-related quality of life (p = 0.07); and self-efficacy (p = 0.09). Carers in group B (vs. group A) reported a tendency for reduced strain (p = 0.06). At 36 weeks post recruitment, 3 months after the end of PCA support for group B, there were few differences between the groups. Participants reported learning about Parkinson’s, and valued individual attention. The MDT cost £833; PCA support was £600 extra, per patient (2011 Great British pounds).ConclusionsFurther research is needed into ways of sustaining benefits from rehabilitation including the use of care assistants.Study registrationCurrent Controlled Trials: ISRCTN44577970.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme and the South East Coast Dementias and Neurodegenerative Disease Research Network (DeNDRoN), and the NHS South East Coast. The report will be published in full inHealth Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 2, No. 51. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heather Gage
- School of Economics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - Linda Grainger
- School of Economics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - Sharlene Ting
- School of Economics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - Peter Williams
- Department of Mathematics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | | | - Gillian Carey
- School of Economics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - Neville Borg
- School of Economics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - Karen Bryan
- Division of Health and Social Care, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | | | - Patrick Trend
- Department of Neurology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
| | - Julie Kaye
- Division of Health and Social Care, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - Jake Jordan
- School of Economics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - Derick Wade
- Oxford Centre for Enablement, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Stocchi F, Bloem BR. Move for Change Part II: a European survey evaluating the impact of the EPDA Charter for people with Parkinson's disease. Eur J Neurol 2012; 20:461-472. [PMID: 23034057 PMCID: PMC3593160 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2012.03876.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2012] [Accepted: 08/21/2012] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The Move for Change campaign is a three-part series of pan-European surveys designed by the European Parkinson's Disease Association (EPDA) to assess the impact that the EPDA Charter for People with Parkinson's disease (PD) has had since its launch in 1997. Here, we report results from the second survey, focusing on the third right of the Charter; that is, 'all patients have the right to have access to support services'. Although the level of evidence for different support services varies, it is important to ensure that patients can access services with clinically proven benefits. METHODS This survey comprised nine questions administered online via the EPDA and PD organization Web sites. Accessibility of support services was defined as 'services/medication/multidisciplinary healthcare professionals, etc. being available and on hand to patients when required'. RESULTS Neurologists and general practitioners (GPs) received highest accessibility results (90.0 and 87.0% of respondents, respectively), with moderate results for physiotherapists (68.0%) and PD organizations (72.0%) and lower results for PD specialist nurses (26.0%), occupational therapists (23.0%), and counselors (27.0%). Support provided by neurologists and PD specialists was considered to be 'very helpful' by 59.0 and 55.7%, respectively, whilst only 31.8% of respondents gave such favorable ratings to GPs. Funding of services was variable across Europe. CONCLUSIONS These data demonstrate the challenges faced by PD patients in accessing the adequate care and support required throughout the course of their disease. These findings can assist healthcare professionals and policymakers in improving access to support services for patients and their families across Europe.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Stocchi
- Department of Neurology, Institute for Research and Medical Care, IRCCS San Raffaele, Rome, Italy
| | - B R Bloem
- Department of Neurology, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|