ArticleParkinson's disease2024
Home-Based Titration with Duodenal Infusion of Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel in People with Parkinson's Disease: An Observational Feasibility Study.
Article in Parkinson's disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Testing and titration of the right levodopa equivalent dose are usually performed during a hospital admission. However, optimal dose titration in people with Parkinson's disease (PwPs) may depend on home environment, emotional stress, and physical activity of everyday life. Objective: Firstly, to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a home-based LCIG titration program and patients'/caregivers' satisfaction. Secondly, to identify barriers and facilitators for home-based titration. Method: This study assesses the feasibility and safety of home-based titration of levodopa duodenal infusions with the use of self-reported evaluation questionnaires with open-ended questions included, registration of total time used, and number of contacts/visits. A telemedicine solution was used to remotely monitor the patients, adjust treatment, and provide support and guidance to patients and caregivers. Results: Ten of 12 PwPs (5 females and 7 males) completed the total titration program. Eight of the 12 PwPs were dependent on help. These 8 PwPs also had a high burden of nonmotor symptoms (NMS). Cognitive impairments varied in severity (range 16-30). Time spent with home visits was on average 93.4 minutes (ranging from 35 to 180 minutes), and the length of the total titration (LCIG initiation to termination of titration) was on average 3.4 days with 2-5 (mean 3.2) contacts/visits with PD team members. The average score on the satisfaction evaluation questionnaires was lower in the caregiver group (mean 31.8) than the PwP outcome (mean 36.2). Conclusions: Telehealth-assisted home-based titration programs are feasible due to the length of the titration period, number of contacts, and time spent in PwPs' private homes, are rated satisfactory and safe by PwPs and caregivers, and may be a substitute for in-hospital treatment. Clinical recommendations including facilitators and barriers from a patient/caregiver perspective are displayed. This trial is registered with NCT4196647.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.