Evaluative comparison of physician-based vs. patient-based outcomes in posterior lumbar fusion

Posterior lumbar fusion is a frequently performed procedure in spinal surgery. High percentages of good and excellent results are indicated by physicians. On the other hand patient-based outcomes are reported. Little is known about the correlations of these two assessment types. We aimed at their comparison. The analysis included 1013 patients with degenerative spinal disease or spondylolisthesis from an international spine registry, treated with posterior lumbar fusion. All patients were pre/postop assessed by physician-based McNab criteria (‘excellent’, ‘good’, ‘fair’, ‘poor’). Of these patients, 210 (mean age 61 years; 57% females) were in addition assessed by patient-based Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The remaining 803 patients (mean age 59 years; 56% females) were assessed by patient-based Core Outcome Measure Index (COMI), including Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain as well as verbal self-rating (‘helped a lot’, ‘helped’, ‘helped only little’, ‘didn’t help’, ‘made things worse’). McNab criteria were compared to the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) in ODI (12.8), in VAS back (1.2) and leg pain (1.6). We investigated the correlations between McNab criteria and these patient-based outcomes. In the ‘excellent’ group as rated by physicians, the proposed MCID was reached in 83% of patients for ODI, in 69% for VAS back and in 83% for VAS leg pain. All patients said the treatment had ‘helped’ or ‘helped a lot’. In the ‘good’ group 56% (ODI), 66% (back pain) and 86% (leg pain) reached the MCID. 96% of patients perceived the treatment as positive. In the ‘fair’ group 37% (ODI), 55% (back pain) and 63% (leg pain) reached the MCID. 49% had positive treatment considerations. The ‘poor’ group revealed 30% (ODI), 35% (back pain) and 44% (leg pain) of patients with reached MCID. Only 15% rated the treatment as positive. The Spearman correlation coefficients between McNab criteria on the one hand and ODI, back and leg pain as well as patients’ verbal self-rating on the other hand were 0.57, 0.37, 0.36 and 0.46 respectively. The comparison of physician and patient-based outcomes showed the highest correlations between McNab criteria and ODI, somewhat weaker correlations with patients’ self-rating and the weakest correlations with back and leg pain. Based on these findings, physicians’ evaluation of patient outcomes can be considered a valuable part of patient assessment, corresponding very well with patients’ perceptions of success or failure of spinal surgery.

Predicting the risk of hospital admission in older persons--validation of a brief self-administered questionnaire in three European countries

OBJECTIVES: To validate the Probability of Repeated Admission (Pra) questionnaire, a widely used self-administered tool for predicting future healthcare use in older persons, in three European healthcare systems. DESIGN: Prospective study with 1-year follow-up. SETTING: Hamburg, Germany; London, United Kingdom; Canton of Solothurn, Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS: Nine thousand seven hundred thirteen independently living community-dwelling people aged 65 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Self-administered eight-item Pra questionnaire at baseline. Self-reported number of hospital admissions and physician visits during 1 year of follow-up. RESULTS: In the combined sample, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) were 0.64 (95% confidence interval (CI)=0.62-0.66) for the prediction of one or more hospital admissions and 0.68 (95% CI=0.66-0.69) for the prediction of more than six physician visits during the following year. AUCs were similar between sites. In comparison, prediction models based on a person's age and sex alone exhibited poor predictive validity (AUC or= 0.5) were 2.3 times as likely (95% CI=2.1-2.6) as low-risk individuals to have a hospital admission, and 2.1 times as likely (95% CI=2.0-2.2) to have more than six physician visits. CONCLUSION: The Pra instrument exhibits good validity for predicting future health service use on a population level in different healthcare settings. Administrative data have shown similar predictive validity, but in practice, such data are often not available. The Pra is likely of high interest to governments and health insurance companies worldwide as a basis for programs aimed at health risk management in older persons.

Patients motives for choosing a physician: Comparison between conventional and complementary medicine in Swiss primary care

Background The study is part of a nationwide evaluation of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in primary care in Switzerland. The Objective was to identify patients' expectations and reasons governing the choice of complementary medicine compared with conventional primary care (CONV). Methods The data were derived from the PEK study (Programm Evaluation Komplementärmedizin), which was conducted in 2002–2003 with 7879 adult patients and parents of 1291 underage patients, seeking either complementary (CAM) or conventional (CONV) primary care. The study was performed as a cross-sectional survey. The respondents were asked to document their (or their children's) self-perceived health status, reasons governing their choice, and treatment expectations. Physicians were practicing conventional medicine and/or complementary methods (homeopathy, anthroposophic medicine, neural therapy, and traditional Chinese medicine). Reasons governing the choice of physician were evaluated on the basis of a three-part classification (physician-related, procedure-related, and pragmatic/other reasons) Results and Discussion Patients seeing CAM physicians tend to be younger and more often female. CAM patients referred to procedure-related reasons more frequently, whereas pragmatic reasons dominated among CONV patients. CAM respondents expected fewer adverse side effects compared to conventional care patients. Conclusion The majority of alternative medicine users appear to have chosen CAM mainly because they wish to undergo a certain procedure; additional reasons include desire for more comprehensive treatment, and expectation of fewer side-effects.

Self-reported non-adherence to antiretroviral therapy repeatedly assessed by two questions predicts treatment failure in virologically suppressed patients

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to explore the predictive value of longitudinal self-reported adherence data on viral rebound. METHODS: Individuals in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study on combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) with RNA <50 copies/ml over the previous 3 months and who were interviewed about adherence at least once prior to 1 March 2007 were eligible. Adherence was defined in terms of missed doses of cART (0, 1, 2 or >2) in the previous 28 days. Viral rebound was defined as RNA >500 copies/ml. Cox regression models with time-independent and -dependent covariates were used to evaluate time to viral rebound. RESULTS: A total of 2,664 individuals and 15,530 visits were included. Across all visits, missing doses were reported as follows: 1 dose 14.7%, 2 doses 5.1%, >2 doses 3.8% taking <95% of doses 4.5% and missing > or =2 consecutive doses 3.2%. In total, 308 (11.6%) patients experienced viral rebound. After controlling for confounding variables, self-reported non-adherence remained significantly associated with the rate of occurrence of viral rebound (compared with zero missed doses: 1 dose, hazard ratio [HR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-1.48; 2 doses, HR 2.17, 95% CI 1.46-3.25; >2 doses, HR 3.66, 95% CI 2.50-5.34). Several variables significantly associated with an increased risk of viral rebound irrespective of adherence were identified: being on a protease inhibitor or triple nucleoside regimen (compared with a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor), >5 previous cART regimens, seeing a less-experienced physician, taking co-medication, and a shorter time virally suppressed. CONCLUSIONS: A simple self-report adherence questionnaire repeatedly administered provides a sensitive measure of non-adherence that predicts viral rebound.

Prevalence and risk factors of late presentation for HIV diagnosis and care in a tertiary referral centre in Switzerland.

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY We sought to identify reasons for late human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing or late presentation for care. METHODS A structured chart review was performed to obtain data on test- and health-seeking behaviour of patients presenting late with CD4 cell counts below 350 cells/µl or with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), at the Zurich centre of the Swiss HIV Cohort Study between January 2009 and December 2011. Logistic regression analyses were used to compare demographic characteristics of persons presenting late with not late presenters. RESULTS Of 281 patients, 45% presented late, 48% were chronically HIV-infected non-late presenters, and an additional 7% fulfilled the <350 CD4 cells/µl criterion for late presentation but a chart review revealed that lymphopenia was caused by acute HIV infection. Among the late presenters, 60% were first tested HIV positive in a private practice. More than half of the tests (60%) were suggested by a physician, only 7% following a specific risk situation. The majority (88%) of patients entered medical care within 1 month of testing HIV positive. Risk factors for late presentation were older age (odds ratio [OR] for ≥50 vs <30 years: 3.16, p = 0.017), Asian versus Caucasian ethnicity (OR 3.5, p = 0.021). Compared with men who have sex with men (MSM) without stable partnership, MSM in a stable partnership appeared less likely to present late (OR 0.50, p = 0.034), whereas heterosexual men in a stable partnership had a 2.72-fold increased odds to present late (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS The frequency of late testing could be reduced by promoting awareness, particularly among older individuals and heterosexual men in stable partnerships.