Objective: A 'case scenario' study on clinical decisions in progressing Parkinson's disease (PD) was developed to complement scientific evidence with the collective judgment of a panel of experts.
Methods: The opinions of 9 experts in movement disorders on the appropriateness of 9 common pharmacological treatments for 33 hypothetical patient profiles were compared to those of 14 general neurologists. Before rating the case scenarios, all participants received a document integrating European and US guidelines for the treatment of patients with advanced PD. Case scenarios showing disagreement or with inconsistencies in appropriateness ratings were discussed at a feedback meeting. A tool for interactive discussion on the clinical case scenarios included was developed based on the outcome of the study.
Results: Current guidelines are often insufficient to adequately guide the management of patients with progressing PD. The case scenario study did not reveal major differences in opinions between experts in movement disorders and general neurologists about the appropriateness of certain drug choices for specific case scenarios. However in about 1 out of 5 treatment decisions where experts stated appropriateness or inappropriateness, the general neurologists panel had no or dispersed opinions.
Conclusions: This study reveals more uncertainty about treatment of advanced PD in general neurologists compared with experts in movement disorders and underlines the need for additional support for guiding treatment decisions in clinical practice.