Patient and Informant Views on Visual Hallucinations in Parkinson Disease.

OBJECTIVE Visual hallucinations (VHs) are a very personal experience, and it is not clear whether information about them is best provided by informants or patients. Some patients may not share their hallucinatory experiences with caregivers to avoid distress or for fear of being labeled insane, and others do not have informants at all, which limits the use of informant-based questionnaires. The aim of this study was to compare patient and caregiver views about VHs in Parkinson disease (PD), using the North-East Visual Hallucinations Interview (NEVHI). METHODS Fifty-nine PD patient-informant pairs were included. PD patients and informants were interviewed separately about VHs using the NEVHI. Informants were additionally interviewed using the four-item version of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory. Inter-reliability and concurrent validity of the different measures were compared. RESULTS VHs were more commonly reported by patients than informants. The inter-rater agreement between NEVHI-patient and NEVHI-informant was moderate for complex VHs (Cohen's kappa = 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.75; t = 3.43, df = 58, p = 0.001) and feeling of presence (Cohen's kappa = 0.35; 95% CI: 0.00-0.70; t = 2.75, df = 58, p = 0.006), but agreement was poor for illusions (Cohen's kappa = 0.25; 95% CI: -0.07-0.57; t = 2.36, df = 58, p = 0.018) and passage hallucinations (Cohen's kappa = 0.16; 95% CI: -0.04-0.36; t = 2.26, df = 58, p = 0.024). CONCLUSION When assessing VHs in PD patients, it is best to rely on patient information, because not all patients share the details of their hallucinations with their caregivers.

What happens to the bone flap? Long-term outcome after reimplantation of cryoconserved bone flaps in a consecutive series of 92 patients.

BACKGROUND Reimplantation of cryoconserved autologous bone flaps is a standard procedure after decompressive craniotomies. Aseptic necrosis and resorption are the most frequent complications of this procedure. At present there is no consensus regarding the definition of the relevant extent and indication for surgical revision. The objective of this retrospective analysis was to identify the incidence of bone flap resorption and the optimal duration of follow-up. METHODS Between February 2009 and March 2012, 100 cryoconserved autologous bone flaps were reimplanted at the Department of Neurosurgery, Inselspital Bern. Three patients were not available for follow-up, and five patients died before follow-up. All patients underwent follow-up at 6 weeks and a second follow-up more than 12 months postoperatively. A clinical and CT-based score was developed for judgment of relevance and decision making for surgical revision. RESULTS Mean follow-up period was 21.6 months postoperatively (range: 12 to 47 months); 48.9 % (45/92) of patients showed no signs of bone flap resorption, 20.7 % (19/92) showed minor resorption with no need for surgical revision, and 30.4 % (28/92) showed major resorption (in 4 % of these the bone flap was unstable or collapsed). CONCLUSIONS Aseptic necrosis and resorption of reimplanted autologous bone flaps occurred more frequently in our series of patients than in most reports in the literature. Most cases were identified between 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Clinical observation or CT scans of patients with autologous bone flaps are recommended for at least 12 months. Patient-specific implants may be preferable to autologous bone flaps.

Quality Control for SP Performance Regarding Patient Portrayal in a High-Stakes OSCE

Introduction Since the quality of patient portrayal of standardized patients (SPs) during an Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) has a major impact on the reliability and validity of the exam, quality control should be initiated. Literature about quality control of SP’s performance focuses on feedback [1, 2] or completion of checklists [3, 4]. Since we did not find a published instrument meeting our needs for the assessment of patient portrayal, we developed such an instrument after being inspired by others [5] and used it in our high-stakes exam. Methods SP trainers from all five Swiss medical faculties collected and prioritized quality criteria for patient portrayal. Items were revised with the partners twice, based on experiences during OSCEs. The final instrument contains 14 criteria for acting (i.e. adequate verbal and non-verbal expression) and standardization (i.e. verbatim delivery of the first sentence). All partners used the instrument during a high-stakes OSCE. Both, SPs and trainers were introduced to the instrument. The tool was used in training (more than 100 observations) and during the exam (more than 250 observations). FAIR_OSCE The list of items to assess the quality of the simulation by SPs was primarily developed and used to provide formative feedback to the SPs in order to help them to improve their performance. It was therefore named “Feedbackstruckture for the Assessment of Interactive Role play in Objective Structured Clinical Exams (FAIR_OSCE). It was also used to assess the quality of patient portrayal during the exam. The results were calculated for each of the five faculties individually. Formative evaluation was given to the five faculties with individual feedback without revealing results of other faculties other than overall results. Results High quality of patient portrayal during the exam was documented. More than 90% of SP performances were rated to be completely correct or sufficient. An increase in quality of performance between training and exam was noted. In example the rate of completely correct reaction in medical tests increased from 88% to 95%. 95% completely correct reactions together with 4% sufficient reactions add up to 99% of the reactions meeting the requirements of the exam. SP educators using the instrument reported an augmentation of SPs performance induced by the use of the instrument. Disadvantages mentioned were high concentration needed to explicitly observe all criteria and cumbersome handling of the paper-based forms. Conclusion We were able to document a very high quality of SP performance in our exam. The data also indicate that our training is effective. We believe that the high concentration needed using the instrument is well invested, considering the observed augmentation of performance. The development of an iPad based application for the form is planned to address the cumbersome handling of the paper.