Fatigue, one of the most prevalent and underassessed nonmotor symptoms in patients with Parkinson disease (PD), is reported to be a major cause of disability and reduced quality of life. The purpose of this review was to systematically examine the scientific literature and report how fatigue is defined and measured and what interventions are used to treat it. A synthesis of the current literature will expose the current state of the science of fatigue in PD, propose areas for future research, and offer practice implications. An integrative review of the literature was conducted. The electronic databases CINAHL, Psychinfo, and PUBMED were searched using the keywords "Parkinson's disease," "fatigue," "definition," "mental fatigue," "physical fatigue," "measurement," "interventions," "treatment," and "methylphenidate." One hundred fourteen articles were found. Nineteen studies met review criteria. No universal definition of fatigue in PD was found, making it difficult to measure. However, central, physical, mental, and peripheral fatigues were described. Six scales were found that measure fatigue in PD; only one specific to PD, the Parkinson Fatigue Scale, measured physical fatigue. Seven studies reported interventions to treat fatigue and were categorized as medication, exercise, and alternative interventions. None of these interventions had a significant effect on fatigue. Findings showed that (a) there is a lack of a universally accepted definition of fatigue because of its subjective nature, (b) existing fatigue measurement tools do not measure all types of fatigue in PD, and (c) no intervention had a significant effect on fatigue. There is a need to define and explore fatigue further using qualitative methods. Further development of instruments to measure fatigue in women, younger onset, and older adults with PD is needed. A focus on person-centered interventions to reduce fatigue in patients with PD is a research priority.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 May 2015.
All research outputs
#27,729,878
of 34,364,397 outputs
Outputs from Journal of neuroscience nursing
#697
of 1,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,311
of 307,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of neuroscience nursing
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,364,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,211 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,975 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
