Determinants of Dyadic Relationship and Its Psychosocial Impact in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease and Their Spouses
Table 1
Demographics and clinical features. dyads.
PD-patient
PD-partner
Female
(%)
22 (43.1)
29 (56.9)
Level of education
Elementary
(%)
8 (15.7)
6 (11.8)
Secondary
(%)
11 (21.6)
16 (31.4)
University
(%)
32 (62.7)
29 (56.9)
Level of income (SEK)
0–199,000
(%)
13 (25.5)
13 (25.5)
200,000–450,000
(%)
27 (52.9)
30 (58.8)
>450,000
(%)
11 (21.6)
8 (15.7)
Retired
(%)
45 (88.2)
39 (76.5)
Working
(%)
10 (19.6)
16 (31.4)
Total MS
m (SD)
3.2 (0.65)
2.9 (0.77)
Dimension of MS
Love
md (IQR)
3.6 (0.67)
3.6 (1.0)
Shared pleasurable activities
md (IQR)
3.2 (1.25)
3.0 (1.25)
Shared values
md (IQR)
3.0 (1.0)
3.0 (1.5)
Reciprocity
md (IQR)
3.3 (1.0)
2.8 (1.67)
Total CBS
m (SD)
42.5 (15.8)
PD-duration
m (SD)
8.4 (6.4)
PDQ8SI
m (SD)
27.4 (14.6)
IQCODE
M (SD)
3.2 (.53)
Hohen & Yahr
md (IQR)
2.0 (1)
NMSQuest
m (SD)
12.1 (4.6)
UPDRS III
m (SD)
18.1 (5.8)
PD-patients self-rating of motor signs
Tremor
(%)
28 (54.9)
Bradykinesia
(%)
43 (84.3)
Rigidity
(%)
38 (74.5)
Gait
(%)
35 (68.6)
Notes: PD: Parkinson’s disease, MS: mutuality scale, CBS: caregiver burden scale, PDQ8SI: the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire Summery Index, IQCODE: Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, NMSQuest: Non-motor Symptoms Questionnaire, and UPDRS III: the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale-Part III. Some of the study subjects were still working.
