International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 2011
Carer burden in apathy and impulse control disorders in Parkinson's disease.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Leroi Iracema, Harbishettar Vijay, Andrews Michelle, McDonald Kathryn, Byrne E Jane, Burns Alistair
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The neuropsychiatric complications of Parkinson's disease (PD), which include behaviour disturbances such as apathy and the impulse control disorders (ICDs), may have a significant effect on patients with PD and their carers. The contribution of these behaviour disorders to carer burden is less understood. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the relationship that apathy and ICDs have with carer burden.
METHODS: Non-demented (n = 71) PD-carer dyads (spouse or adult child) participated in the study. The PD participants were divided into three behavioural groups: ICD (n = 21), apathy (n = 22) and controls (n = 28). The three groups were compared for level of burden in their carers by using the Zarit Burden Interview. The PD participants were rated for levels of apathy, impulsivity and motor and psychiatric symptoms. Using a multivariate analysis, we sought the PD-related predictors of carer burden.
RESULTS: Significantly, greater burden was seen in carers of PD participants with ICDs (p = 0.002) or apathy (p = 0.004), compared with carers of PD participants without such behavioural disturbances. Linear regression models revealed that attentional ability accounted for burden in carers of the group with apathy, whereas dopaminergic load and depression accounted for burden in carers of the group with impulsivity.
CONCLUSION: PD-related behaviour disturbances, such as apathy and ICDs, as well as psychiatric complications, have significant negative implications for burden of care.
METHODS: Non-demented (n = 71) PD-carer dyads (spouse or adult child) participated in the study. The PD participants were divided into three behavioural groups: ICD (n = 21), apathy (n = 22) and controls (n = 28). The three groups were compared for level of burden in their carers by using the Zarit Burden Interview. The PD participants were rated for levels of apathy, impulsivity and motor and psychiatric symptoms. Using a multivariate analysis, we sought the PD-related predictors of carer burden.
RESULTS: Significantly, greater burden was seen in carers of PD participants with ICDs (p = 0.002) or apathy (p = 0.004), compared with carers of PD participants without such behavioural disturbances. Linear regression models revealed that attentional ability accounted for burden in carers of the group with apathy, whereas dopaminergic load and depression accounted for burden in carers of the group with impulsivity.
CONCLUSION: PD-related behaviour disturbances, such as apathy and ICDs, as well as psychiatric complications, have significant negative implications for burden of care.