ObjectiveTo evaluate whether a 4-week multidisciplinary, aerobic, motor-cognitive and intensive rehabilitation treatment (MIRT) improves the quality of life (QoL) of patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD), in the short-term and long-term period.MethodsThis is a prospective, parallel-group, single-centre, single-blind, randomised clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02756676). 186 patients with PD, assigned to experimental group, underwent MIRT; conversely, 48 patients, assigned to control group, did not receive rehabilitation. Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire-39 was assessed 2 (T0), 10 (T1) and 18 (T2, only experimental group) weeks after the enrolment. We compared T1 versus T0 scores within subjects and delta scores (T1–T0) between subjects. To investigate the long-term effects, we compared T2 and T0 scores in the experimental group.ResultsAt T0, no between-group differences in the Global Index Score (GBI) were observed (experimental group: 43.6±21.4, controls: 41.6±22.9, P=0.50). At T1, we did not find significant changes in controls (delta score: 1.2±9.9, P=0.23), and we found an improvement in GBI in the experimental group (delta score: −8.3±18.0, P<0.0001), significant also between subjects (P<0.0001). Comparing T2 versus T0 in the experimental group, the GBI maintained a significant improvement (delta score: −4.8±17.5, P<0.0001).ConclusionsA rehabilitation treatment such as MIRT could improve QoL in patients with PD in the short-term and long-term period. Even though the single-blind design and the possible role of the placebo effect on the conclusive results must be considered as limitations of this study, the improvement in outcome measure, also maintained after a 3-month follow-up period, suggests the effectiveness of MIRT on the QoL.Clinical trial registrationNCT02756676: Pre-results.

ObjectiveFreezing of gait (FoG) is a debilitating problem in patients with PD. The multifactorial pathogenesis of FoG remains poorly understood. We aimed to find which factors are most strongly associated with the occurrence of FoG.MethodsThree hundred five PD patients were enrolled and subdivided according to the presence (FoG +, n = 128) or absence (FoG-, n = 177) of FoG. Several clinical, functional, and neuropsychological data were collected and compared between groups. The association between the probability of presence of FoG and possible explanatory variables was assessed by logistic regression analysis.ResultsFoG + patients were younger at the diagnosis (p = 0.04), and their mean daily dose of dopaminergic drugs (p < 0.0001) was higher in comparison with FoG- patients. FoG + patients get worse in Frontal Assessment Battery (p = 0.005), had higher scores in Apathy Evaluation Scale (p = 0.03), and were much more impaired on Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) (p = 0.018), Trail Making Test A (p = 0.0013), and Ray Auditory Verbal Learning Test (p = 0.012). Levodopa equivalent dose, age (direct), age at disease onset (inverse), and WCST were significant predictors of FoG (p = 0.01, p = 0.0025, p = 0.0016, and p = 0.029, respectively).ConclusionFoG + patients show more deficits in executive functions and in motivation. The main explanatory variables of FoG occurrence are levodopa equivalent dose, age, age at disease onset, and WCST. These data suggest that a specific involvement of frontal cortical circuits in PD is responsible for certain cognitive–behavioral alterations related to the occurrence of FoG.

The assessment of cognitive deficits is pivotal for diagnosis and management in patients with parkinsonisms. Low levels of correspondence are observed between evaluations assessed with screening cognitive tests in comparison with those assessed with in-depth neuropsychological batteries. A new tool, we named CoMDA (Cognition in Movement Disorders Assessment), was composed by merging Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB). In total, 500 patients (400 with Parkinson’s disease, 41 with vascular parkinsonism, 31 with progressive supranuclear palsy, and 28 with multiple system atrophy) underwent CoMDA (level 1–L1) and in-depth neuropsychological battery (level 2–L2). Machine learning was developed to classify the CoMDA score and obtain an accurate prediction of the cognitive profile along three different classes: normal cognition (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and impaired cognition (IC). The classification accuracy of CoMDA, assessed by ROC analysis, was compared with MMSE, MoCA, and FAB. The area under the curve (AUC) of CoMDA was significantly higher than that of MMSE, MoCA and FAB (p < 0.0001, p = 0.028 and p = 0.0007, respectively). Among 15 different algorithmic methods, the Quadratic Discriminant Analysis algorithm (CoMDA-ML) showed higher overall-metrics performance levels in predictive performance. Considering L2 as a 3-level continuous feature, CoMDA-ML produces accurate and generalizable classifications: micro-average ROC curve, AUC = 0.81; and AUC = 0.85 for NC, 0.67 for MCI, and 0.83 for IC. CoMDA and COMDA-ML are reliable and time-sparing tools, accurate in classifying cognitive profile in parkinsonisms.This study has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04858893).

Background and AimsRecent studies suggest cognitive, emotional, and behavioral impairments occur in patients after SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, studies are limited to case reports or case series and, to our knowledge, few of them have control groups. This study aims to assess the prevalence of neuropsychological and neuropsychiatric impairment in patients after hospitalization.MethodsWe enrolled 29 COVID+ patients (M/F: 17/12; age 58.41 ± 10.00 years; education 11.07 ± 3.77 years, 2 left handers) who needed hospitalization but no IC, about 20 days post-dismission, and 29 COVID− healthy matched controls. Neuropsychological and neuropsychiatric assessments were conducted via teleneuropsychology using the following tests: MMSE, CPM47, RAVLT, CDT, Digit-Span Forward/Backward, Verbal fluencies; BDI-II, STAI. People with previous reported cognitive impairment and neurological or psychiatric conditions were excluded. Clinical and demographics were collected. Comparison between groups was conducted using parametric or non-parametric tests according to data distribution (T-test, Mann Withney-U test; Chi-square goodness of fit). Within COVID+ group, we also evaluated the correlation between the cognitive and behavioral assessment scores and clinical variables collected.ResultsAmong COVID+, 62% had at least one pathological test (vs. 13% in COVID−; p = 0.000) and significantly worst performances than COVID− in RAVLT learning (42.55 ± 10.44 vs. 47.9 ± 8.29, p = 0.035), RAVLT recall (8.79 ± 3.13 vs. 10.38 ± 2.19, p = 0.03), and recognition (13.69 ± 1.47 vs. 14.52 ± 0.63, p = 0.07). STAI II was higher in COVID− (32.69 ± 7.66 vs. 39.14 ± 7.7, p = 0.002). Chi-square on dichotomous values (normal/pathological) showed a significant difference between groups in Digit backward test (pathological 7/29 COVID+ vs. 0/29 COVID−; p = 0.005).ConclusionsPatients COVID+ assessed by teleneuropsychology showed a vulnerability in some memory and executive functions (working memory, learning, delayed recall, and recognition). Intriguingly, anxiety was higher in the control group. Our findings therefore confirm the impact of COVID-19 on cognition even in patients who did not need IC. Follow-up is needed to evaluate the evolution of COVID-19-related cognitive deficit.Clinical Trial Registration[ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [NCT05143320].

BackgroundQuality of life (QoL) is the sense of well-being perceived by people. The improvement of parkinsonian patient’s QoL is a crucial goal for clinicians involved in rehabilitative care. In order to provide an appropriate endpoint for the assessment of the effectiveness of rehabilitation treatments on QoL of patients with Parkinson’s Disease (PD), in this study we have first translated and then validated the Belastungsfragebogen Parkinson kurzversion (BELA-P-k). This tool allows evaluating separately two crucial aspects: i) the loss of personal autonomy in activities of daily life and ii) the psychological and psychosocial impact of the disease.MethodsThe BELA-P-k was translated from Dutch into Italian. Subsequently 202 PD patients filled out the questionnaire. Patients were also evaluated by using the Parkinson Disease Questionnaire −39 (PDQ39), the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB).ResultsThe internal consistency for total of two different scores Bothered by (Bb) and Need for Help (NfH) was excellent (p = 0.91) for both categories. The correlation between Bb and NfH categories was significant and strong, very-strong, ranging from 0.78 to 0.88 (all p < 0.0001). Finally, the value of Spearman r for the relationship between Bb and NfH items and PDQ 39 values were significant (p ≤ 0.003).ConclusionsIn conclusion, we validated the BELA-P-k and demonstrated that it is an appropriate and potentially useful tool for assessing QoL in the management of PD.Trials registrationThis trial was retrospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03073044.