5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Focus on Depression in Parkinson's Disease: A Delphi Consensus of Experts in Psychiatry, Neurology, and Geriatrics

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Major and minor forms of depression are significant contributors to Parkinson's disease morbidity and caregiver burden, affecting up to 50% of these patients. Nonetheless, symptoms of depression are still underrecognized and undertreated in this context due to scarcity of evidence and, consequently, consistent clinical guideline recommendations. Here, we carried out a prospective, multicentre, 2-round modified Delphi survey with 49 questions about the aetiopathological mechanisms of depression in Parkinson's disease (10), clinical features and connections with motor and nonmotor symptoms (10), diagnostic criteria (5), and therapeutic options (24). Items were assessed by a panel of 37 experts (neurologists, psychiatrists, and a geriatrist), and consensus was achieved in 81.6% of them. Depressive symptoms, enhanced by multiple patient circumstances, were considered Parkinson's disease risk factors but not clinical indicators of motor symptom and disease progression. These patients should be systematically screened for depression while ruling out both anhedonia and apathy symptoms as they are not necessarily linked to it. Clinical scales (mainly the Geriatric Depression Scale GDS-15) can help establishing the diagnosis of depression, the symptoms of which will require treatment regardless of severity. Efficacious and well-tolerated pharmacological options for Parkinson's comorbid depression were selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (especially sertraline), dual-action serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (venlafaxine, desvenlafaxine, and duloxetine), multimodal (vortioxetine, bupropion, mirtazapine, and tianeptine), and anti-Parkinsonian dopamine agonists (pramipexole, ropinirole, and rotigotine). Tricyclic antidepressants and combining type B monoamine oxidase inhibitors with serotonergic drugs have serious side effects in these patients and therefore should not be prescribed. Electroconvulsive therapy was indicated for severe and drug-refractory cases. Cognitive behavioural therapy was recommended in cases of mild depression. Results presented here are useful diagnostic and patient management guidance for other physicians and important considerations to improve future drug trial design.

          Related collections

          Most cited references64

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Using and Reporting the Delphi Method for Selecting Healthcare Quality Indicators: A Systematic Review

          Objective Delphi technique is a structured process commonly used to developed healthcare quality indicators, but there is a little recommendation for researchers who wish to use it. This study aimed 1) to describe reporting of the Delphi method to develop quality indicators, 2) to discuss specific methodological skills for quality indicators selection 3) to give guidance about this practice. Methodology and Main Finding Three electronic data bases were searched over a 30 years period (1978–2009). All articles that used the Delphi method to select quality indicators were identified. A standardized data extraction form was developed. Four domains (questionnaire preparation, expert panel, progress of the survey and Delphi results) were assessed. Of 80 included studies, quality of reporting varied significantly between items (9% for year's number of experience of the experts to 98% for the type of Delphi used). Reporting of methodological aspects needed to evaluate the reliability of the survey was insufficient: only 39% (31/80) of studies reported response rates for all rounds, 60% (48/80) that feedback was given between rounds, 77% (62/80) the method used to achieve consensus and 57% (48/80) listed quality indicators selected at the end of the survey. A modified Delphi procedure was used in 49/78 (63%) with a physical meeting of the panel members, usually between Delphi rounds. Median number of panel members was 17(Q1:11; Q3:31). In 40/70 (57%) studies, the panel included multiple stakeholders, who were healthcare professionals in 95% (38/40) of cases. Among 75 studies describing criteria to select quality indicators, 28 (37%) used validity and 17(23%) feasibility. Conclusion The use and reporting of the Delphi method for quality indicators selection need to be improved. We provide some guidance to the investigators to improve the using and reporting of the method in future surveys.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Snowball Sampling

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Update on treatments for nonmotor symptoms of Parkinson's disease—an evidence‐based medicine review

              ABSTRACT Objective To update evidence‐based medicine recommendations for treating nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). Background The International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Evidence‐Based Medicine Committee's recommendations for treatments of PD were first published in 2002, updated in 2011, and now updated again through December 31, 2016. Methods Level I studies testing pharmacological, surgical, or nonpharmacological interventions for the treatment of nonmotor symptoms in PD were reviewed. Criteria for inclusion and quality scoring were as previously reported. The disorders covered were a range of neuropsychiatric symptoms, autonomic dysfunction, disorders of sleep and wakefulness, pain, fatigue, impaired olfaction, and ophthalmologic dysfunction. Clinical efficacy, implications for clinical practice, and safety conclusions are reported. Results A total of 37 new studies qualified for review. There were no randomized controlled trials that met inclusion criteria for the treatment of anxiety disorders, rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder, excessive sweating, impaired olfaction, or ophthalmologic dysfunction. We identified clinically useful or possibly useful interventions for the treatment of depression, apathy, impulse control and related disorders, dementia, psychosis, insomnia, daytime sleepiness, drooling, orthostatic hypotension, gastrointestinal dysfunction, urinary dysfunction, erectile dysfunction, fatigue, and pain. There were no clinically useful interventions identified to treat non‐dementia‐level cognitive impairment. Conclusions The evidence base for treating a range of nonmotor symptoms in PD has grown substantially in recent years. However, treatment options overall remain limited given the high prevalence and adverse impact of these disorders, so the development and testing of new treatments for nonmotor symptoms in PD remains a top priority. © 2019 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Parkinsons Dis
                Parkinsons Dis
                pd
                Parkinson's Disease
                Hindawi
                2090-8083
                2042-0080
                2021
                8 February 2021
                : 2021
                : 6621991
                Affiliations
                1Servicio de Psiquiatría, Instituto de Investigación i+12, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
                2Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), Madrid, Spain
                3Movement Disorders Unit, Servicio de Neurología, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain
                4Movement Disorders Unit, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain
                5Service of Psychiatry, University Hospital Ramón y Cajal. CIBERSAM, IRYCIS. University of Alcalá, Madrid, Spain
                6Service of Neurology, HGU Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain
                7Memory Disorders Unit, HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
                8Service of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario “San Jorge”, Huesca, Spain
                9Neurological Rehabilitation Unit, Clínica Ubarmin, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain
                10Service of Neurology, Instituto de Neurociencias, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, San Carlos, IdISSC, Madrid, Spain
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: Giuseppina Martella

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2410-2880
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5605-0619
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6547-7617
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9243-0339
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7034-682X
                Article
                10.1155/2021/6621991
                7884180
                33628415
                69286bb8-c549-4203-be58-5af76c57c947
                Copyright © 2021 Luis Agüera-Ortiz et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 27 October 2020
                : 7 January 2021
                : 22 January 2021
                Categories
                Research Article

                Neurology
                Neurology

                Comments

                Comment on this article