Remote programming versus standard in-person programming following deep brain stimulation in patients with Parkinson's disease: a randomised controlled trial
In brief
Remote DBS programming matches in-person care for motor improvement
In a randomized trial of 41 Parkinson's patients who completed six-month follow-up, remote programming achieved motor symptom gains that were statistically non-inferior to standard in-person programming, staying within a 10% margin. Scores on non-motor symptoms, quality of life, and patient satisfaction were similar, suggesting remote visits could be a convenient alternative without sacrificing efficacy.
- Journal
- EClinicalMedicine (Q1)
- Published
- 9 July 2026
- Study design
- Randomized controlled trial
- Evidence level
- Level 1, High (CEBM 1b)
- Authors
- Xiaonan Wan, Yaodong Zhou, Peng Huang, Yixin Pan, Zhengyu Lin, Zhitong Zeng, et al.
- PMID
- 42472285
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.eclinm.2026.104070
Why clinicians should know about it
- Picked for Neurosurgery (top studies of the week, 26 July 2026): Remote DBS programming non-inferior to in-person for Parkinson's
- Picked for Family Practice (paper of the day, 20 July 2026).
- Picked for Neurology (clinical) (paper of the day, 20 July 2026).
- Picked for Surgery (paper of the day, 20 July 2026).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Remote programming (RP) offers a convenient alternative for patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) who have undergone deep brain stimulation (DBS). However, its clinical efficacy remains underexplored. We aimed to compare the treatment effects of RP and in-person standard programming (SP) in this population. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial at a single centre in China between October 2023 and February 2025. This study included PD patients who underwent bilateral subthalamic nucleus DBS surgery. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the RP or SP group. The primary outcome was the improvement rate in motor symptoms from baseline to 6-month follow-up, assessed using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). Secondary outcomes included changes in non-motor symptoms, quality of life, and patients' subjective experiences of the programming sessions. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06078397). FINDINGS: A total of 50 patients were enrolled; 20 in the SP group and 21 in the RP group completed the 6-month follow-up. With a non-inferiority margin of 10%, the improvement rate in the total UPDRS-III score in the RP group was found to be non-inferior to that in the SP group, as the one-sided lower bound of the 95% confidence interval (-0.033) exceeded -0.100 (-10%). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in non-motor symptoms, quality of life, or subjective programming experiences (all p > 0.05). INTERPRETATION: RP offers short-term motor improvements that are non-inferior to in-person SP in PD patients following DBS surgery, which also yields comparable outcomes in non-motor symptoms and quality of life. FUNDING: Dianyou Li was funded by Shanghai Municipal Health Commission (Grant No. 202140181), Shanghai Science and Technology Commission (Grant No. 22Y11903900), Guangci Innovative Technology Launch Program (Grant No. GCQH202205), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82571678 to D.L.); Xiaonan Wan was funded by King's College London-China Scholarship Council Scholarship.
Abstract as published, via PubMed.
For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.