Jump to content

Talk:Parkinson-plus syndrome

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

note

[edit]

Who is the intended reader of this article and other medical articles? If the purpose is to be accessible and useful to a layperson, it would probably be better to describe symptoms as (for example)

difficulty with balance and coordination of the legs and arms (ataxia)

rather than "cerebellar ataxia" --Sjsilverman 23:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Does olivopontocerebellar atrophy (OPCA) still exist? JFW | T@lk 15:33, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In my 12 months as a neurology trainee I haven't heard it mentioned in the differential of Parkinson-Plus. I imagine it does exist as a pathological entity but is no longer diagnosed clinically. I do notice that a lot of MSA patients are having karyotypes for fragile X syndrome - this may be worth mentioning. Dubbin 21:21, 19 September 2005 (UTC) Dubbin[reply]
It appears to. See site Elsewhere it is described as a parkinsons plus disease. See Movement Disorders Group I've provisionally adde it here. --Sjsilverman 23:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose this page should mention the diagnostic workup. Does your institution still believe in Shy-Drager? JFW | T@lk 17:38, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shy-Drager is something I've been accustomed to treat as a synonym for MSA (of any combination of its possible features). A recent edit to the page suggested its being MSA with autonomic failure, which I am entirely prepared to accept. As to workup, this perhaps depends too heavily on the particular features of the P+ syndrome, as well as the institution, individual clinician and degree of diagnostic uncertainty. Might listing all possible investigations create shopping lists for worried patients? Dubbin 20:58, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I avoid this conundrum by phrasing it: "the diagnosis is typically made with blah blah; doctors may also request blah blah and blah". Patients should not have a shopping list, but their clinician may need to justify why he/she has not performed a karyogram on them (e.g. because FXS would be unlikely in a female patient, or something in that vein). JFW | T@lk 18:05, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This section is to discuss whether to merge Parkinson plus syndrome into Parkinson's disease#classification--Robert Treat (talk) 02:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"... sporadically" in 2nd sentence

[edit]

"Parkinson-plus syndromes are either inherited genetically or occur sporadically." In that context, I can't imagine that "sporadically" is the right word. Writer/editor must have meant "spontaneously." Another possibility is "idiopathically". Yeltommo (talk) 09:31, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yeltommo That terminology shows up in multiple citations in the article. Looking the term up in medical dictionaries, it seems to be defined as,occurring occasionally, singly, or in scattered instances. sporadic diseases and arising or occurring randomly with no known cause. P37307 (talk) 12:09, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@P37307 Fair enough. To me it implies the disease could come and go, but if it has a different standard meaning in medical contexts, that's fine. Thanks for clarifying. Yeltommo (talk) 06:40, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Yeltommo, I looked and there is a Sporadic disease article on Wikipedia and I hyperlinked it in the article. I guess the word could be replace with, occurs randomly with no known cause. I think the average reader would agree with your inclination of the word on first read so maybe linking the page will help readers that want to dig deeper. That article starts out with, In epidemiology, sporadic is a term used to refer to a disease which occurs only infrequently, haphazardly, irregularly or occasionally from time to time in a few isolated places with no discernible temporal or spatial pattern, as opposed to a recognizable epidemic or endemic pattern. Thanks for bringing this up because it might help clarify the disease for people who are reading because they were diagnosed and give them false hope or understanding of the illness if the use the non-medical definition in their research. P37307 (talk) 07:17, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]