Abstract
Objective
Falls are a serious complication of Parkinson's disease, leading to functional decline, psychological distress, and substantial economic burden. Although multiple interventions have been proposed, structured quantitative guidance on prioritising fall-prevention strategies for clinical implementation in Parkinson's disease remains limited.
Design
A multi-method study integrating a structured narrative review, expert consensus via a two-round Delphi process with 15 multidisciplinary Parkinson's disease experts, and multi-criteria decision-making using the Best–Worst Method to identify and quantitatively prioritise fall-prevention strategies for people with Parkinson's disease.
Setting
Expert-based consensus and decision-analysis study.
Participants
Fifteen multidisciplinary experts with clinical and research expertise in Parkinson's disease and neurorehabilitation.
Intervention
Fall-prevention interventions identified through a structured narrative review and refined through a two-round Delphi process, followed by prioritisation using the Best–Worst Method.
Main measures
Relative priority weights of intervention categories and sub-criteria derived using the Best–Worst Method based on expert judgements.
Results
The Delphi process yielded three main criteria (exercise, dance-based interventions, and neuroscience-based interventions) and 14 sub-criteria. Best–Worst Method weighting showed that exercise had the highest priority (weight=0.49), followed by dance-based interventions (weight=0.32) and neuroscience-based interventions (weight=0.19). Within exercise, balance training and resistance strength training received the greatest weights, whereas Tai Chi and transcranial direct current stimulation received the highest expert-derived priority weights within the dance-based and neuroscience-based categories, respectively.
Conclusion
This integrative framework provides an evidence-informed hierarchy of expert-derived priorities for fall-prevention interventions and may support clinical decision-making and programme design, while highlighting the need for further effectiveness and implementation research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
