Skip to main content
. 2011 Feb 15;2011(2):CD005504. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005504.pub2

Benes 1999.

Methods Randomised controlled crossover trial of levodopa versus placebo
Dropouts/withdrawals: PP of 32 with premature discontinuations of 3 patients in the treatment group.
Participants Included/analysed: 35/32
Demographics: 13 male, age 56 years
Diagnosis: RLS according to IRLSSG, PLMS/h > 5, symptoms for at least 2 weeks, sleep onset latency > 30 min and/or sleep efficiency ≤ 85%
Setting: 3 centres in Germany
Baseline: PLMI (using actigraphy) 49.5 ± 29.2
Interventions Intervention: flexible uptitration of single dose levodopa/benserazide from 100 mg/25 mg to 200 mg/50 mg in 3 weeks, maintenance for 1 week
Control: flexible uptitration of single dose placebo capsules in 3 weeks, maintenance for 1 week
No washout between treatment periods
Outcomes Change of symptoms: CGI‐Improvement
Objective quality of sleep: PLM‐Index (using actigraphy)
Self rated quality of sleep: SF‐A
Quality of life: VAS on life satisfaction
Safety: Number of drop outs due to adverse events, number of patients experiencing adverse events
funding source The study was supported by a grant from Hoffmann La‐Roche, Inc.
Notes PLMI: index of number of periodic limb movements per hour time in bed; CGI‐I: Clinical Gobla Impressions ‐ Improvement; SF‐A: Schlaffragebogen‐A; VAS: Visual Analogue Scale
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Adequate sequence generation? Low risk Randomisation list was produced by the statistical department of the sponsor.
Allocation concealment? Low risk Patients had to be allocated to a numbered medication in ascending order. Due to the blinding of the medication, investigators and patients were not informed regarding treatment sequence or medication.
Blinding? 
 All outcomes Unclear risk White capsules of identical size and shape, the capsules were not differentiable. The capsules which had to be taken in one cross‐over period were filled in a glass and labelled with "week 3‐6" and "week 7‐10", respectively. Blinding of polysomnography raters was not mentioned.
Incomplete outcome data addressed? 
 All outcomes Low risk No incomplete outcome data.
Free of selective reporting? Low risk All results reported as prespecified with additional sleep data.
Free of other bias? Low risk Low indication of bias.