Search

Contains fulltext : 229744.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Quality of life in Parkinson's disease (PD) is affected by motor and nonmotor symptoms, necessitating an integrated care approach. Existing care models vary considerably in numerous domains. The objectives of this study were to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of PD integrated care models and develop recommendations for a representative model. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of published integrated care models and a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials examining integrated care versus standard care. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life using a validated PD scale. We evaluated levels of care integration using the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care. RESULTS: Forty-eight publications were identified, including 8 randomized, controlled trials with health-related quality of life data (n = 1,149 total PD patients). Qualitative evaluation of individual care model integration guided by the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care revealed frequent clinical and professional integration, but infrequent organizational and population-based integration elements. Meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials revealed significant heterogeneity (I(2) = 90%, P < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis including only outpatient care models (n = 5) indicated homogeneity of effects (I(2) = 0%, P = 0.52) and improved health-related quality of life favoring integrated care, with a small effect size (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.17; 95% CI, -0.31 to -0.03; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient integrated PD care models may improve patient-reported health-related quality of life compared with standard care; however, because of variable methodological approaches and a high risk of bias related to inherent difficulties in study design (eg, blinding of participants and interventionists), generalizability of these results are difficult to establish. The Rainbow Model of Integrated Care is a promising method of evaluating elements and levels of

Background: Optimal management in expert centers for Parkinson's disease (PD) usually involves pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, delivered by a multidisciplinary approach. However, there is no guideline specifying how this model should be organized. Consequently, the nature of multidisciplinary care varies widely. Objective(s): To optimize care delivery, we aimed to provide recommendations for the organization of multidisciplinary care in PD. Method(s): Twenty expert centers in the field of multidisciplinary PD care participated. Their leading neurologists completed a survey covering eight themes: elements for optimal multidisciplinary care; team members; role of patients and care partners; team coordination; team meetings; inpatient versus outpatient care; telehealth; and challenges towards multidisciplinary care. During a consensus meeting, outcomes were incorporated into concept recommendations that were reviewed by each center's multidisciplinary team. Three patient organizations rated the recommendations according to patient priorities. Based on this feedback, a final set of recommendations (essential elements for delivery of multidisciplinary care) and considerations (desirable elements) was developed. Result(s): We developed 30 recommendations and 10 considerations. The patient organizations rated the following recommendations as most important: care is organized in a patient-centered way; every newly diagnosed patient has access to a core multidisciplinary team; and each team has a coordinator. A checklist was created to further facilitate its implementation. Conclusion(s): We provide a practical tool to improve multidisciplinary care for persons with PD at the organizational level. Future studies should focus on implementing these recommendations in clinical practice, evaluating their potential applicability and effectiveness, and comparing alternative models of PD care.Copyright © 2020 - IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved.

Background: Quality of life in Parkinson's disease (PD) is affected by motor and nonmotor symptoms, necessitating an integrated care approach. Existing care models vary considerably in numerous domains. The objectives of this study were to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of PD integrated care models and develop recommendations for a representative model. Method(s): We conducted a systematic review of published integrated care models and a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials examining integrated care versus standard care. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life using a validated PD scale. We evaluated levels of care integration using the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care. Result(s): Forty-eight publications were identified, including 8 randomized, controlled trials with health-related quality of life data (n = 1,149 total PD patients). Qualitative evaluation of individual care model integration guided by the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care revealed frequent clinical and professional integration, but infrequent organizational and population-based integration elements. Meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials revealed significant heterogeneity (I2 = 90%, P ' 0.0001). Subgroup analysis including only outpatient care models (n = 5) indicated homogeneity of effects (I2 = 0%, P = 0.52) and improved health-related quality of life favoring integrated care, with a small effect size (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.17; 95% CI, -0.31 to -0.03; P = 0.02). Conclusion(s): Outpatient integrated PD care models may improve patient-reported health-related quality of life compared with standard care; however, because of variable methodological approaches and a high risk of bias related to inherent difficulties in study design (eg, blinding of participants and interventionists), generalizability of these results are difficult to establish. The Rainbow Model of Integrated Care is a promising method of evaluating elements and levels of

In this study, we performed a survey of infantile and late-onset Pompe disease (IOPD and LOPD) in Austria. Paediatric and neuromuscular centres were contacted to provide a set of anonymized clinical and genetic data of patients with IOPD and LOPD. The number of patients receiving enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) was obtained from the pharmaceutical company providing alglucosidase alfa. We found 25 patients in 24 families, 4 IOPD and 21 LOPD with a resulting prevalence of 1:350,914. The most frequent clinical manifestation in LOPD was a lower limb-girdle phenotype combined with axial weakness. Three patients were clinically pauci- or asymptomatic and were diagnosed because of persistent hyperCKemia. Diagnostic delay in LOPD was 7.4 ± 9.7 years. The most common mutation was c.-32-13T > G. All IOPD and 17 symptomatic LOPD patients are receiving ERT. Standardized follow-up was only available in six LOPD patients for the 6-min walk test (6minWT) and in ten for the forced vital capacity (FVC). Mean FVC did not decline (before ERT; 63.6 ± 39.7%; last evaluation during ERT: 61.9 ± 26.9%; P = 0.5) while there was a trend to decline in the mean distance covered by the 6minWT (before ERT: 373.5 ± 117.9 m; last evaluation during ERT: 308.5 ± 120.8 m; P = 0.077). The study shows a lower prevalence of Pompe disease in Austria than in other European countries and corroborates a limb-girdle phenotype with axial weakness as the most common clinical presentation, although asymptomatic hyperCKemia may be the first indication of LOPD.

Many practical clinical questions regarding the management of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)- associated neurocognitive disorder (HAND) remain unanswered. We sought to identify and develop practical answers to key clinical questions in HAND management. Sixty-six specialists from 30 countries provided input into the program, which was overseen by a steering committee. Fourteen questions were rated as being of greatest clinical importance. Answers were drafted by an expert group based on a comprehensive literature review. Sixty-three experts convened to determine consensus and level of evidence for the answers. Consensus was reached on all answers. For instance, good practice suggests that all HIV patients should be screened for HAND early in disease using standardized tools. Follow-up frequency depends on whether HAND is already present or whether clinical data suggest risk for developing HAND. Worsening neurocognitive impairment may trigger consideration of antiretroviral modification when other causes have been excluded. The Mind Exchange program provides practical guidance in the diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of HAND.