Modulating arousal to overcome gait impairments in Parkinson’s disease: how the noradrenergic system may act as a double-edged sword

Table 1 Respondent characteristics

	Total cohort	Have used ‘Altering the Mental State’ strategies	Have never used ‘altering the mental state’ strategies	P-value^b
Respondents (n (%))	4324	1343 (31.1)	2981 (68.9)
Men (n (%))	2387 (55.3)	706 (52.6)	1681 (56.4)	0.022*
Age (years)	67.8 ± 9.0	67.5 ± 9.0	68.6 ± 9.0	0.371
Time since diagnosis (years)	6.7 ± 5.3	7.0 ± 5.3	6.5 ± 5.2	0.004*
Respondents with FOG (n (%))	1900 (43.9)	661 (49.2)	1239 (41.6)	< 0.001*
NFOG-Q score^a (median [range])	17 [1–28]	18 [1–27]	17 [1–28]	0.005*
Experienced ≥ 1 fall in preceding 12 months (n (%))	2266 (52.4)	784 (58.4)	1482 (49.7)	< 0.001*

Values are presented as mean ± SD, unless otherwise specified
FOG, Freezing of gait; NFOG-Q, New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (score range 0–28) [29]
The asterisks indicates that the presented p-value has surpassed the threshold of statistical significance (<0.05)
^aAmong respondents with freezing of gait, defined by a non-zero NFOG-Q score
^bRespondents who had ever used ‘Altering the Mental State’ strategies versus Respondents who had never used ‘Altering the mental State’ strategies, assessed by independent t-tests and chi-square tests
*Statistically significant difference

ISSN: 2047-9158