Total amount: € 0,00
Official Journal of the , , , ,
In association with
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,063
Online ISSN 1973-9095
Anna GIARDINI 1, Antonia PIEROBON 1, Simona CALLEGARI 1, Gabriella BERTOTTI 2, Marina MAFFONI 1, Giuseppe FRAZZITTA 3, 4
1 Psychology Unit, Scientific Institute of Montescano, S. Maugeri Foundation IRCCS, Montescano, Pavia, Italy; 2 Department of Neurorehabilitation, Scientific Institute of Montescano, S. Maugeri Foundation IRCCS, Montescano, Pavia, Italy; 3 Moriggia Pelascini Hospital, Gravedona ed Uniti, Como, Italy; 4 Fondazione Europea Ricerca Biomedica FERB, S. Isidoro Hospital, Trescore Balneario, Bergamo, Italy
BACKGROUND: Non-pharmacological approaches to PD disease management seems to be a growing and promising field of investigation. Indeed interesting new perspectives are forthcoming from studies on physical rehabilitation and on physical exercise.
AIM: To qualitatively describe the rehabilitation experience of Parkinson Disease patients taking part in a Multidisciplinary Intensive Rehabilitation Treatment (MIRT) consisting of four weeks of physical therapy and exercise, with three daily sessions, five days a week.
DESIGN: Data from a qualitative observational study with patients’ interviews were analysed.
SETTING: PD inpatients of a Neurorehabilitation Department.
POPULATION: Convenient sample of 27 PD patients (M=13; F=14), mean age 70.3±8.5 and mean disease duration 8.25 ± 6.9 years; Hoehn-Yahr stage 3, hospitalized for the 4-week MIRT.
METHODS: Verbatim transcriptions of 27 semi-structured interviews were analysed using the Grounded Theory methodology.
RESULTS: Depressive symptoms were present in 55.5% of the patients measured by Geriatric Depression Scale: mild (n=8; 30.0%), moderate (n=6; 22.2%), severe (n=1; 3.7%). The core category Efficacy of active living identified the becoming conscious of the usefulness of a proactive lifestyle to counterattack disease degeneration. The category Satisfaction described patients’ satisfaction upon MIRT, resulting in a perceived enhanced functionality (coherently with quantitative functional parameters improvement at discharge) and a rediscovered autonomy. The category Future described the intention to continue the rehabilitation prescription at home embracing a more dynamic lifestyle. Of interest is that the majority in the interview used body related terms and described perceived changes through the body itself. Verbs of perception (see, feel, perceive) were used in a spontaneous way by all inpatients. The inpatients experienced not only through their mind but also by means of body perceptions how a proactive lifestyle could become a means of disease control.
CONCLUSIONS: The positive subjective response to rehabilitation described qualitatively in this study, opens perspectives for tailoring interventions focusing also on patients’ self, self-efficacy and perceived efficacy of active living.
CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Patients’ proactive disposition may widen the perspective on patients’ motivation to rehabilitation. A multidisciplinary intervention may act both on physical and subjective disease aspects; paying attention to patients’ subjective feedbacks could contribute reliably to guide for medical decisions in managing tailored and detailed interventions.