Mannitol dry powder challenge in comparison with exercise testing in children

Rationale Mannitol dry powder (MDP) challenge is an indirect bronchial provocation test, which is well studied in adults but not established for children. Objective We compared feasibility, validity, and clinical significance of MDP challenge with exercise testing in children in a clinical setting. Methods Children aged 6–16 years, referred to two respiratory outpatient clinics for possible asthma diagnosis, underwent standardized exercise testing followed within a week by an MDP challenge (Aridol™, Pharmaxis, Australia). Agreement between the two challenge tests using Cohen's kappa and receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curves was compared. Results One hundred eleven children performed both challenge tests. Twelve children were excluded due to exhaustion or insufficient cooperation (11 at the exercise test, 1 at the MDP challenge), leaving 99 children (mean ± SD age 11.5 ± 2.7 years) for analysis. MDP tests were well accepted, with minor side effects and a shorter duration than exercise tests. The MDP challenge was positive in 29 children (29%), the exercise test in 21 (21%). Both tests were concordant in 83 children (84%), with moderate agreement (κ = 0.58, 95% CI 0.39–0.76). Positive and negative predictive values of the MDP challenge for exercise-induced bronchoconstriction were 68% and 89%. The overall ability of MDP challenge to separate children with or without positive exercise tests was good (area under the ROC curve 0.83). Conclusions MDP challenge test is feasible in children and is a suitable alternative for bronchial challenge testing in childhood. Pediatr. Pulmonol. 2011; 46:842–848. © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of traditional and new partner notification technologies for curable sexually transmitted infections: observational study, systematic reviews and mathematical modelling

BACKGROUND Partner notification is essential to the comprehensive case management of sexually transmitted infections. Systematic reviews and mathematical modelling can be used to synthesise information about the effects of new interventions to enhance the outcomes of partner notification. OBJECTIVE To study the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of traditional and new partner notification technologies for curable sexually transmitted infections (STIs). DESIGN Secondary data analysis of clinical audit data; systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) published from 1 January 1966 to 31 August 2012 and of studies of health-related quality of life (HRQL) [MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Knowledge, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA)] published from 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2011; static models of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; and dynamic modelling studies to improve parameter estimation and examine effectiveness. SETTING General population and genitourinary medicine clinic attenders. PARTICIPANTS Heterosexual women and men. INTERVENTIONS Traditional partner notification by patient or provider referral, and new partner notification by expedited partner therapy (EPT) or its UK equivalent, accelerated partner therapy (APT). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Population prevalence; index case reinfection; and partners treated per index case. RESULTS Enhanced partner therapy reduced reinfection in index cases with curable STIs more than simple patient referral [risk ratio (RR) 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.89]. There are no randomised trials of APT. The median number of partners treated for chlamydia per index case in UK clinics was 0.60. The number of partners needed to treat to interrupt transmission of chlamydia was lower for casual than for regular partners. In dynamic model simulations, > 10% of partners are chlamydia positive with look-back periods of up to 18 months. In the presence of a chlamydia screening programme that reduces population prevalence, treatment of current partners achieves most of the additional reduction in prevalence attributable to partner notification. Dynamic model simulations show that cotesting and treatment for chlamydia and gonorrhoea reduce the prevalence of both STIs. APT has a limited additional effect on prevalence but reduces the rate of index case reinfection. Published quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) weights were of insufficient quality to be used in a cost-effectiveness study of partner notification in this project. Using an intermediate outcome of cost per infection diagnosed, doubling the efficacy of partner notification from 0.4 to 0.8 partners treated per index case was more cost-effective than increasing chlamydia screening coverage. CONCLUSIONS There is evidence to support the improved clinical effectiveness of EPT in reducing index case reinfection. In a general heterosexual population, partner notification identifies new infected cases but the impact on chlamydia prevalence is limited. Partner notification to notify casual partners might have a greater impact than for regular partners in genitourinary clinic populations. Recommendations for future research are (1) to conduct randomised controlled trials using biological outcomes of the effectiveness of APT and of methods to increase testing for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and STIs after APT; (2) collection of HRQL data should be a priority to determine QALYs associated with the sequelae of curable STIs; and (3) standardised parameter sets for curable STIs should be developed for mathematical models of STI transmission that are used for policy-making. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Ranking of tests for pain hypersensitivity according to their discriminative ability in chronic neck pain

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is widely used to investigate peripheral and central sensitization. However, the comparative performance of different QST for diagnostic or prognostic purposes is unclear. We explored the discriminative ability of different quantitative sensory tests in distinguishing between patients with chronic neck pain and pain-free control subjects and ranked these tests according to the extent of their association with pain hypersensitivity. METHODS We performed a case-control study in 40 patients and 300 control subjects. Twenty-six tests, including different modalities of pressure, heat, cold, and electrical stimulation, were used. As measures of discrimination, we estimated receiver operating characteristic curves and likelihood ratios. RESULTS The following quantitative sensory tests displayed the best discriminative value: (1) pressure pain threshold at the site of the most severe neck pain (fitted area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.92), (2) reflex threshold to single electrical stimulation (0.90), (3) pain threshold to single electrical stimulation (0.89), (4) pain threshold to repeated electrical stimulation (0.87), and (5) pressure pain tolerance threshold at the site of the most severe neck pain (0.86). Only the first 3 could be used for both ruling in and out pain hypersensitivity. CONCLUSIONS Pressure stimulation at the site of the most severe pain and parameters of electrical stimulation were the most appropriate QST to distinguish between patients with chronic neck pain and asymptomatic control subjects. These findings may be used to select the tests in future diagnostic and longitudinal prognostic studies on patients with neck pain and to optimize the assessment of localized and spreading sensitization in chronic pain patients.