You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letter
The long-term outcome of impulsive compulsive behaviours in Parkinson’s disease
  1. Pedro Melo Barbosa1,2,3,
  2. Atbin Djamshidian1,4,
  3. Sean S O'Sullivan5,
  4. Eduardo de Pablo-Fernandez1,2,3,
  5. Prasad Korlipara2,3,
  6. Huw R Morris2,3,
  7. Kailash P Bhatia2,3,
  8. Patricia Limousin2,3,
  9. Thomas Foltynie2,3,
  10. Andrew J Lees1,
  11. Thomas T Warner1,2,3
  1. 1 Reta Lila Weston Institute of Neurological Studies, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK
  2. 2 Department of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK
  3. 3 The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London UK
  4. 4 Department of Neurology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria
  5. 5 Department of Neurology, Bon Secours Hospital, Cork, Ireland
  1. Correspondence to Dr Thomas T Warner, Reta Lila Weston Institute of Neurological Studies, Department of Clinical and Movement Neuroscience, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London WC1N1PJ, UK; t.warner{at}ucl.ac.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2018-319891

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Introduction

    Impulsive compulsive behaviours (ICBs) such as dopamine dysregulation syndrome (DDS), pathological gambling, compulsive sexual behaviour, punding, compulsive shopping and binge eating are recognised complications of dopaminergic treatment that affect at least one in seven patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD).1 Only a few studies provide long-term data on ICBs although any firm conclusions are limited by restricted follow-up periods. We present long-term longitudinal data on 46 PD patients with ICBs with follow-up for a mean period of 8.2 years.

    Methods

    Patients with PD and ICBs who participated in previous research studies from 2007 to 2012 visit 1 (V1) were invited for re-assessment visit 2 (V2). Participants underwent a clinical interview and assessment with questionnaires and scales (detailed in online supplementary materials). The diagnosis of ICBs was based on screening questionnaires and confirmed with a structured interview. The study received ethics approval. Data was analysed in Statistical Package for Social Science 22 (SPSS 22). All variables were tested for normality and statistical tests chosen accordingly. A p value<0.05 was considered significant. Bonferroni correction was applied for comparison between visits and significance was considered to have been reached when p<0.025.

    Supplemental material

    [jnnp-2018-319891supp001.pdf]

    Results

    Of the 90 original participants, 46 were included. Eight declined to participate, five were lost to follow-up and 31 had died (see online supplementary figure 1). No cases of suicide or traumatic fatality were reported. Participants were followed up for 8.2 years (±2.6). Three patients had a biallelic parkin mutation. See table 1 for demographic and clinical details at each visit and online supplementary table 1 for results of the scales/questionnaires used at V2.

    View this table:
    • In this window
    • In a new window
    Table 1

    Comparison between visits

    Initial treatment of ICBs consisted of …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors PB: Conception, organisation and execution of the research project; statistical analysis design and execution; and writing of the first draft, review and final approval the manuscript. AD: Conception and organisation of the research project; design, review and critique of the statistical analysis; and review, critique and final approval of the manuscript. SOS: Conception and organisation of the research project; review and critique of the statistical analysis; and review, critique and final approval of the manuscript. EPF: Organisation of the research project; review and critique of the statistical analysis; and review, critique and final approval of the manuscript. PK: Review and critique of the statistical analysis and review, critique and final approval of the manuscript. HM: Review and critique of the statistical analysis and review, critique and final approval of the manuscript. KPB: Review and critique of the statistical analysis and review, critique and final approval of the manuscript. PL: Review and critique of the statistical analysis and review, critique and final approval of the manuscript. TF: Review and critique of the statistical analysis and review, critique and final approval of the manuscript. AJL: Review and critique of the statistical analysis and review, critique and final approval of the manuscript. TTW: Conception and organisation of the research project; design, review and critique of the statistical analysis; and review, critique and final approval of the manuscript.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent for publication Parental/guardian consent obtained

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    • Data sharing statement Data is available upon personal request.