Effectiveness of Rotigotine plus intensive and goal-based rehabilitation versus Rotigotine alone in “de-novo” Parkinsonian subjects: a randomized controlled trial with 18-month follow-up
Background Dopamine Replacement Therapy (DRT) represents the most effective treatment for Parkinson’s disease (PD). Nevertheless, several symptoms are unresponsive to treatment and its long-term use leads to serious side effects. To optimize the pharmacological management of PD, dopamine-agonists ar...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of neurology 2018-04, Vol.265 (4), p.906-916 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
Dopamine Replacement Therapy (DRT) represents the most effective treatment for Parkinson’s disease (PD). Nevertheless, several symptoms are unresponsive to treatment and its long-term use leads to serious side effects. To optimize the pharmacological management of PD, dopamine-agonists are often prescribed to “de-novo” patients. Moreover, several studies have shown the effectiveness and the synergic effect of rehabilitation in treating PD.
Objective
To evaluate the synergism between DRT and rehabilitation in treating PD, by investigating the short and the long-term effectiveness of a multidisciplinary, intensive and goal-based rehabilitation treatment (MIRT) in a group of patients treated with Rotigotine.
Materials and methods
In this multicenter, single blinded, parallel-group, 1:1 allocation ratio, randomized, non-inferiority trial, 36 “de-novo” PD patients were evaluated along 18 months: 17 were treated with Rotigotine plus MIRT; 19 were treated with Rotigotine alone (R). The primary outcome measure was the total score of Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). The secondary outcomes included the UPDRS sub-sections II and III (UPDRS II-III), the 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), the Timed Up and Go Test (TUG) and the amount of Rotigotine. Patients were evaluated at baseline (T0), 6 months (T1), 1 year (T2), and at 18 months (T3).
Results
No differences in UPDRS scores in the two groups (total score, III part and II part,
p
= 0.48,
p
= 0.90 and
p
= 0.40, respectively) were found in the time course. Conversely, a greater improvement in Rotigotine + MIRT group was observed for 6MWT (
p
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 0340-5354 1432-1459 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00415-018-8792-0 |