English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background As most patients are likely to first interface with their community general practitioner (GP) or geriatrician for chronic healthcare conditions, these non-neurologists practitioners are well-placed to diagnose, initiate treatment in symptomatic Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients, and provide regular and timely management of their PD. However, current studies suggest that the role of the GP and geriatrician in providing holistic care for PD patients may be limited by factors such as patient perceptions, and a lack of knowledge base in the quality measures of care. This paper aims to better understand the different management styles between GPs and geriatricians practicing in public institutions in Singapore, qualify the difficulties they face in providing patient-centric care for PD patients, and identify any gaps in quality measures of care. Methods A questionnaire was completed anonymously by GPs ( n  = 43) and geriatricians ( n  = 33) based at public institutions, on a voluntary basis before a compulsory didactic teaching on PD. Questions were modelled after quality measures set out by the American Academy of Neurology, specifically eliciting information on falls, non-motor symptoms, exercise regime and medication-related symptoms. “PD management practices and styles” questions were answered by the respondents on a 4-point Likert scale. Results Geriatricians spent more time in consult with PD patients compared with GPs (median [Q1-Q3] = 20 [15–30] vs 10 [10–15] minutes,  p  &lt;  0.001). Geriatricians were more comfortable initiating PD medications than GPs (OR = 11.8 [95% CI: 3.54–39.3],  p  &lt;  0.001), independent of gender, years of practice and duration of consult. Comfort in initiating dopamine replacement therapy (OR 1.06 [1.00–1.36],  p  = 0.07; aOR = 1.14 [1.02–1.26],  p  = 0.02) also increased with physician’s years of practice. Unfamiliarity with the types and/or doses of the medications was the most cited barrier faced by GPs (76.7%). Geriatricians were more likely than GPs to ask about falls (100% vs 86.0%,  p  = 0.025), non-motor symptoms (75.8% vs 53.5%,  p  = 0.049) and the patient’s regular physical activities (72.7% vs 41.9%,  p  = 0.01). Conclusions This study identified key patterns in the management practices and styles of non-neurologists physicians, and identified gaps in current practice. Our data suggests that interventions directed at education on PD medication prescriptions and provision of patient PD education, creation of best clinical practice guidelines, and accreditation by national bodies may instil greater confidence in practitioners to initiate and continue patient-centric PD care. A longer consultation duration with PD patients should be considered to allow physicians to get a greater scope of the patient’s needs and better manage them.

bmc health services research

A cross-sectional study of knowledge and practices in the management of patients with Parkinson’s disease amongst public practice-based general practitioners and geriatricians