1,721,079 research outputs found

    Costs of Parkinson's Disease and Antiparkinsonian Pharmacotherapy: An Italian Cohort Study

    Full text link
    Objective: Antiparkinsonian pharmacotherapy is costly and the determinants of drug costs in Parkinson's disease (PD) have been poorly investigated. The objective of this study was to investigate the costs of PD and antiparkinsonian drugs in an Italian cohort of patients and identify cost-driving factors of drug therapy. Methods: Seventy outpatients with idiopathic PD were recruited in the Department of Neurology, Napoli University, Italy. Data on resource utilization were collected for 6 months using a bottom-up approach. Clinical status was evaluated using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. Direct and indirect costs were calculated from the societal perspective (figures of year 2009). Independent determinants of total costs and costs of antiparkinsonian drugs were identified using multivariate regression analysis. Results: The total costs of PD were EUR 8,640 (95% CI: EUR 6,700-11,240) per patient over a 6-month period. Direct costs accounted for 70% of the total costs. Antiparkinsonian drugs (EUR 1,450; 95% CI: EUR 1,220-1,760) were the primary component of costs paid by the health insurance (39.6%) and one of the most expensive components of the direct costs (24.0%). The highest copayments made by patients were for antiparkinsonian drugs and medical equipment (58%). Independent determinants of the increased costs of antiparkinsonian pharmacotherapy were younger age and occurrence of motor fluctuations. Conclusions: Antiparkinsonian pharmacotherapy is one of the major cost components of PD-related costs for health insurance. It imposes a considerable economic burden on patients and their families as well. Copyright (C) 2010 S. Karger AG, Base

    Service-based survey of dystonia in Munich

    Full text link
    We performed a service-based epidemiological study of dystonia in Munich, Germany. Due to favourable referral and treatment patterns in the Munich area, we could provide confident data from dystonia patients seeking botulinum toxin treatment. A total of 230 patients were ascertained, of whom 188 had primary dystonia. Point prevalence ratios were estimated to be 10.1 (95% confidence interval 8.4-11.9) per 100,000 for focal and 0.3 (0.0-0.6) for generalised primary dystonia. The most common focal primary dystonias were cervical dystonia with 5.4 (4.2-6.7) and essential blepharospasm with 3.1 (2.1-4.1) per 100,000 followed by laryngeal dystonia (spasmodic dysphonia) with 1.0 (0.4-1.5) per 100,000. Copyright (C) 2002 S. Karger AG, Base

    Periodic motor impairments in a case of 48-hour bipolar ultrarapid cycling before and under treatment with valproate

    Full text link
    Motor impairments of psychiatric patients can be assessed with digital recordings of handwriting tasks. The investigation of patients with bipolar affective disorders differentiates intraindividual changes related to the patient's fluctuating affective states. An unmedicated 67-year-old male with 48-hour bipolar ultrarapid cycling was investigated during 8 consecutive days of ultrarapid cycling and 4 weeks later, after remission under treatment with valproate. The handwriting skills of the patient followed the same rhythmic changes of the psychopathology in the first part of the study and a steady pattern in the second phase, after remission. Therefore, it can be assumed that the handwriting skills reflect a state marker of the disease. Poorer handwriting skills on the manic days, as compared to the depressive ones, support the hypothesis of a low arousal in manic patients. Copyright (C) 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore