Exploratory study shows prescription disparities for Parkinson's treatments between metropolitan and non-metropolitan regions.
Objective Explore Parkinson's Disease (PD) related prescription patterns for people with PD living in metropolitan and non‐metropolitan areas of New South Wales, Australia. Methods Exploratory, cross‐sectional data linkage study. Participants were grouped according to geographic location and by age group: metropolitan or non‐metropolitan; rural, regional, and remote. Prescription patterns were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Design The Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study data was linked to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) records (2004–2017) for all participants with PD. Setting Retrospective data exploration and analysis. Participants 1648 participants who self‐identified as having PD and voluntarily contributed to the 45 and Up longitudinal study. Main Outcome Measures Statistical comparisons based on location were undertaken for the different groupings for PD‐specific medications. Results Significant differences in the proportions of PD‐related medications are observed between locations. Significant differences in the proportions of PD‐related medications are observed between locations. A higher proportion of levodopa and levodopa combinations is reported for major cities (75.5%) compared with the inner region (70.3%) and outer and remote regions (74.1%). Additionally, other PD‐related medications in the non‐metropolitan areas are proportionally higher than those reported for major cities. Analysis by age groups suggests large effect sizes for the 75–79 and 45–49 age groups, while medium and small effect sizes are reported for the 55–59 and 70–74 age groups, respectively. Conclusion Inequities with best practice medication treatment for PD exist between metropolitan and non‐metropolitan areas of NSW. Efforts are required to successfully bridge gaps. Upskilling GPs may provide one way to optimise therapy and quality of life.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Logan et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: