Search

1. We compare the sensitivity and specificity of chosen outcome criteria in a placebo-controlled, randomised cross-over study of the efficacy of maintenance therapy with the levodopa/carbidopa combination (Sinemet Plus) alone. Patients were characterised by having idiopathic Parkinsonism with no overt fluctuations in control in relation to individual doses of medication. 2. The effect of omission of a morning dose of maintenance therapy on simple timed tests of mobility and manual dexterity, and on distance/time parameters of gait was studied in fourteen patients (aged 64 to 88 years). Measurements made 2, 4 and 6 h after morning active and placebo treatments were standardised by taking the pre-treatment measurement on that day as baseline. 3. In a linear model, which allowed for the structure of the study, neither the total time taken by each patient to get up from a chair, walk an individually set distance, turn, return to and sit in the chair, nor the rate of progress at fastening the same set of buttons, was sensitive to the treatment effect. 4. Three of the gait parameters, free walking speed, mean stride length and mean double support time, were sensitive to the treatment effect. Correction for the speed of each walk, caused some reduction in the sensitivity of stride length to treatment effect, but that of double support time remained. Speed, and double support time or stride length, appeared to be complementary in defining the treatment effect. 5. The linear modelling revealed the complexity of the treatment effect. Although active treatment, by comparison with placebo, increased free walking speed (P = 0.019), the more levodopa found in the plasma following treatment, (P = 0.0005) and the greater the increment in the concentration of its peripheral metabolite, 3-O-methyldopa (P = 0.006), the less the beneficial effect. This model may reflect reduced uptake into the brain and/or an adverse effect of parent drug or a metabolite. 6. The specificity of free walking speed for the treatment effect was good, as was that of mean stride length, after it had been corrected for speed of each walk, and of mean double support time, after correction for speed and incorporation of the change in lying blood pressure accompanying treatment into the model. 7. The measurements of gait parameters were ranked according to reliability.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

1. We have used gait analysis to investigate the efficacy of maintenance therapy with a levodopa/carbidopa combination in patients with idiopathic Parkinsonism, who do not have overt fluctuations in control in relation to administration of medication. 2. Fourteen patients (aged 64 to 88 years) receiving maintenance therapy with levodopa and carbidopa (Sinemet Plus) entered a placebo-controlled, randomised cross-over study of the effect of omission of a morning dose of active treatment on distance/time parameters of gait. Measurements made 2, 4 and 6 h after the morning treatment were standardised by taking the pre-treatment measurement on that day as baseline. 3. The mean increase in stride length (7%) and decrease in double support time (20%) on active treatment were small but statistically significant (P less than 0.0001, in each case), there being no significant placebo effect on either gait parameter (P = 0.69 and 0.08 respectively). Neither active nor placebo treatments had any significant (P greater than 0.45 in each case) effect on the lying, standing or postural fall in mean arterial pressure, measurements being made in the same temporal relation to the treatments as was gait. 4. In a generalised linear model, after allowing for the effect (P less than 0.0001) of intrinsic variability in pre-treatment speed as well as for structure of the study, nature of treatment had an effect on stride length over the whole walk, significant at P = 0.002. 5. Pre-treatment postural fall in mean arterial pressure was nearly as significant (P = 0.003) as the nature of treatment in the context of such a model: the greater the fall, the greater the increment in stride length seen following active or placebo treatment. This was probably explained by an acquired tolerance to the fall as the day progressed. 6. The major determinant (P less than 0.0001) of the change in double support time over the whole walk, after allowing for the structure of the study, appeared to be the post treatment mean arterial standing blood pressure. The lower the pressure, the shorter the double support time, and hence, the greater the tendency to a hurried gait. 7. Nature of treatment, when added into the models described in summary points 5 and 6, had no significant effect (P greater than 0.25, in each case).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]