Observation, Analysis and Interpretation....

 
Diagrams and charts were also drawn to substantiate the important findings. All statistical computations were done by using computer packages.

Distribution of patients
according to Age
It is inferred that there is a positive co-relation between
the age of the patient and incidence of P.D.


Distribution of patients
according to Sex
While considering the sex distribution of patients 74% were males
and the remaining 26% were females. Thus the male to female ratio is 3:1.
It appears that the occurrence of Parkinsonism is irrespective of religious status.

Distribution of patients
according to Occupation

Table 1 Distribution of patients according to Place of Living
Place
No. %
Rural 32 64
Urban 18 36

Distribution of patients
according to Economic status

Modified Schwab and England Activities of daily living scale (ADL)
in percentage
Table 2 Mean +/- SD of percentage of ADL before and after treatment
Group
No. BT AT t value P value
Control 13 65.4 +/- 21.5 65.4 +/- 21.5 -- --
A 19 73.7 +/- 22.7 83.4 +/-22.5 12.4 P < 0.001
AE 18 73.3 +/-16.1 85.0 +/-9.6 06.0 P < 0.001

Table 3 Mean +/- SD of ADL score before and after treatment

% Of improvement Paired
Group No. Mean t value P value
A 19 09.70 3.53 0.96 P < 0.05
(NS)
AE 18 11.70 8.22

Table 4 Mean +/- SD of ADL score before and after treatment

Mean +/- SD Paired
Group BT AT t value P value
Control 14.00 +/- 10.50 14.00 +/- 10.50 -- --
A 12.21 +/- 07.47 07.53 +/- 06.81 8.18 P < 0.001
AE 15.39 +/- 10.40 10.00 +/- 05.70 3.81 P< 0.01

Table 5 Comparison of improvement in ADL score of Group A with Group AE
Group Mean SD t value P value
A 4.68 32.5 0.47 P > 0.05
AE 5.39 6.0

Table 6 Mean +/- SD of Mentation, Behavior and Mood score
before and after treatment

Mean +/- SD Paired
Group BT AT t value P value
Control 2.62 +/- 0.87 2.62 +/- 0.87 -- --
A 3.42 +/-2.78 1.89 +/- 2.26 4.24 P < 0.01
AE 3.22 +/- 2.26 2.00 +/-1.68 4.89 P< 0.01

Table 7 Comparison of Mean and SD of the improvement in mentaion, behavior and mood score in Group A with Group AE after treatment
Group Mean SD t value P value
A 1.53 1.58 1.07 P > 0.05
AE 1.22 1.06


Table 8 Mean +/- SD of Motor system examination score
before and after treatment

Mean +/- SD Paired
Group BT AT t value P value
Control 17.92+/- 8.58 17.92 +/-8.58 -- --
A 16.11+/- 11.33 10.05 +/-11.6 8.65 P < 0.001
AE 19. 11+/-9.41 12.17 +/- 6.4 5.03 P< 0.01


Table 9 Comparison Mean improvement in Motor examination score after treatment in Group A with Group AE
Group Mean SD t value P value
A 6.06 3.06 0.58 P > 0.05
AE 6.94 5.84


Complications of therapy Dyskinesias, clinical fluctuations and other complaints.
Group A happened to be superior in keeping the patients free from other complications of therapy. Other complaints like nausea, vomiting and sleep disturbances showed a reduction of 10% after treatment. The general health of the patients in-group A also improved considerably. Thus in this respect treatment of Group A appeared to be superior to AE.


Table 10 Mean +/- SD of Total score before and after treatment

Mean +/- SD Paired
Group BT AT t value P value
Control 39.00+/- 21.00 39.00 +/-21.00 -- --
A 32.16+/- 24.14 20.16 +/-22.30 8.27 P < 0.001
AE 41.00 +/-23.53 25.78 +/- 14.04 3.94 P< 0.01


Table 11 Comparison Mean improvement in Mean score after treatment in
Group A with Group AE
Group Mean SD t value P value
A 12.00 06.3 0.90 P > 0.05
AE 15.22 13.9

 

Table 12 Mean +/- SD of Memory score before and after treatment

Mean +/- SD Paired
Group BT AT t value P value
Control 1.3 +/- 0.5 1.30 +/-0.50 -- --
A 1.47 +/- 0.67 1.11 +/-0.32 3.2 P < 0.05
AE 1.16 +/-0.37 1.00 +/- 0.00 1.85 P> 0.05

Click here to go back Research / Summary / Conclusion / Home page.