This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Neurodegenerative disorders, including Parkinson’s disease (PD), Alzheimer’s disease (AD), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and other progressive conditions, represent a growing public health challenge due to population ageing and rising prevalence. These disorders involve gradual neuronal loss, leading to motor, cognitive, and behavioral impairments that diminish the patients’ quality of life (QoL) and create substantial caregiver and healthcare burdens. This paper examines the impact of multidisciplinary team (MDT) care on clinical outcomes and QoL in neurodegenerative disorders, with a particular focus on the psychologist’s contribution within MDT frameworks; A systematic review and meta-analysis (2018–2025) of six databases included randomized and observational studies comparing MDT versus standard or single-specialist care in adults with PD, dementia, or ALS, reporting validated QoL outcomes. Random-effects models were applied, with heterogeneity, risk of bias, publication bias, and certainty (GRADE) assessed. Meta-regression explored the influence of programme duration and psychologist inclusion; Across the included studies, MDT care was consistently associated with better QoL compared to standard care. Benefits were more evident in interventions of longer durations and in programmes that explicitly include psychological support. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the findings, and no substantial evidence of publication bias was identified. The overall certainty of evidence was rated as moderate, reflecting methodological diversity across studies; MDT care improves QoL in PD, dementia, and ALS. Programmes that are longer and explicitly integrate psychological assessment, therapy, and caregiver support confer greater benefits, supporting the routine inclusion of psychologists in MDT neurorehabilitation pathways.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marchiș et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: