Consensus on the Need for a Hierarchical List of Patient-reported Pain Outcomes for Metaanalyses of Knee Osteoarthritis Trials: An OMERACT Objective.

OBJECTIVE Although protocol registration for systematic reviews is still not mandatory, reviewers should be strongly encouraged to register the protocol to identify the methodological approach, including all outcomes of interest. This will minimize the likelihood of biased decisions in reviews, such as selective outcome reporting. A group of international experts convened to address issues regarding the need to develop hierarchical lists of outcome measurement instruments for a particular outcome for metaanalyses. METHODS Multiple outcome measurement instruments exist to measure the same outcome. Metaanalysis of knee osteoarthritis (OA) trials, and the assessment of pain as an outcome, was used as an exemplar to assess how Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT), the Cochrane Collaboration, and other international initiatives might contribute in this area. The meeting began with formal presentations of background topics, empirical evidence from the literature, and a brief introduction to 2 existing hierarchical lists of pain outcome measurement instruments recommended for metaanalyses of knee OA trials. RESULTS After discussions, most participants agreed that there is a need to develop a methodology for generation of hierarchical lists of outcome measurement instruments to guide metaanalyses. Tools that could be used to steer development of such a prioritized list are the COSMIN checklist (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) and the OMERACT Filter 2.0. CONCLUSION We list meta-epidemiological research agenda items that address the frequency of reported outcomes in trials, as well as methodologies to assess the best measurement properties (i.e., truth, discrimination, and feasibility).

Impact of etanercept-methotrexate therapy on patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis patients with up to 12 months of symptoms.

Background/Purpose: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are critical in evaluating RA treatment effects on function and health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). Significant improvement in PROs has been reported in RA studies of biologic agents, including etanercept (ETN), but most studies have been conducted in patients with established disease. In addition to assessing treatment effects in early RA, there is interest in therapeutic strategies that allow dose reduction or withdrawal of biologic therapy (biologic-free) after induction of response. The PRIZE trial is an ongoing, 3-period study to evaluate the efficacy of combined ETN and methotrexate (MTX) therapy in patients with early, moderate-to-severe RA and to assess whether efficacy (remission) can be maintained with ETN dose reduction or biologic-free (Period 2) or drug-free (Period 3). Herein we report PROs associated with ETN 50 mg QW plus MTX (ETN50/MTX) therapy administered for 52 wks in Period 1 (induction) of the PRIZE trial. Methods: In Period 1, MTX- and biologic-naı‥ve patients with early, active RA (symptom onset 12 mo from enrollment; DAS28 _3.2) received open-label ETN50/MTX for 52 wks. The starting dose of MTX was 10 mg QW; at the discretion of the investigator, titration was permitted up to a maximum of 25 mg QW to achieve remission. Corticosteroid boosts were administered to patients not achieving low disease state at wks 13 and 26, unless contraindicated or not tolerated. PROs were assessed using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) total score; Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS); EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) total index; Short Form Health Survey (SF-36); Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue; Work Instability Scale for Rheumatoid Arthritis (RAWIS); and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Rheumatoid Arthritis (WPAI:RA). Results: A total of 306 patients received treatment in Period 1 (mITT population); 222 (73%) patients completed the period. The majority of patients were female (70%), with a mean age of 50 y, mean DAS28 of 6.0 (median, 6.0), and duration of disease symptoms from onset of 6.5 months (median, 6.3 mo). Significant and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs, including in HAQ, EQ-5D, SF-36, and FACIT-Fatigue, were demonstrated with ETN50/MTX therapy from baseline to the final on therapy visit (Table; P_0.0001). Similar improvements were observed in all dimensions of RA-WIS and WPAI:RA (Table; P_0.0001). Conclusion: Combination therapy with ETN50/MTX for 52 wks in patients with _12 mo of symptomatic, active RA resulted in significant, clinically important improvements in measures of physical function, including normal HAQ (66.6% of patients), HR-QoL, fatigue, and work productivity. These outcomes are consistent with those reported in prior studies in patients with more established disease.

Primary breast lymphoma: patient profile, outcome and prognostic factors. A multicentre Rare Cancer Network study.

BACKGROUND: To asses the clinical profile, treatment outcome and prognostic factors in primary breast lymphoma (PBL). METHODS: Between 1970 and 2000, 84 consecutive patients with PBL were treated in 20 institutions of the Rare Cancer Network. Forty-six patients had Ann Arbor stage IE, 33 stage IIE, 1 stage IIIE, 2 stage IVE and 2 an unknown stage. Twenty-one underwent a mastectomy, 39 conservative surgery and 23 biopsy; 51 received radiotherapy (RT) with (n = 37) or without (n = 14) chemotherapy. Median RT dose was 40 Gy (range 12-55 Gy). RESULTS: Ten (12%) patients progressed locally and 43 (55%) had a systemic relapse. Central nervous system (CNS) was the site of relapse in 12 (14%) cases. The 5-yr overall survival, lymphoma-specific survival, disease-free survival and local control rates were 53%, 59%, 41% and 87% respectively. In the univariate analyses, favorable prognostic factors were early stage, conservative surgery, RT administration and combined modality treatment. Multivariate analysis showed that early stage and the use of RT were favorable prognostic factors. CONCLUSION: The outcome of PBL is fair. Local control is excellent with RT or combined modality treatment but systemic relapses, including that in the CNS, occurs frequently.

What is the new medicines use review ‘patient survey’ attempting to capture in the context of existing patient satisfaction with pharmacy questionnaires and a new conceptual framework?

The community pharmacy service medicines use review (MUR) was introduced in 2005 ‘to improve patient knowledge, concordance and use of medicines’ through a private patient–pharmacist consultation. The MUR presents a fundamental change in community pharmacy service provision. While traditionally pharmacists are dispensers of medicines and providers of medicines advice, and patients as recipients, the MUR considers pharmacists providing consultation-type activities and patients as active participants. The MUR facilitates a two-way discussion about medicines use. Traditional patient–pharmacist behaviours transform into a new set of behaviours involving the booking of appointments, consultation processes and form completion, and the physical environment of the patient–pharmacist interaction moves from the traditional setting of the dispensary and medicines counter to a private consultation room. Thus, the new service challenges traditional identities and behaviours of the patient and the pharmacist as well as the environment in which the interaction takes place. In 2008, the UK government concluded there is at present too much emphasis on the quantity of MURs rather than on their quality.[1] A number of plans to remedy the perceived imbalance included a suggestion to reward ‘health outcomes’ achieved, with calls for a more focussed and scientific approach to the evaluation of pharmacy services using outcomes research. Specifically, the UK government set out the main principal research areas for the evaluation of pharmacy services to include ‘patient and public perceptions and satisfaction’as well as ‘impact on care and outcomes’. A limited number of ‘patient satisfaction with pharmacy services’ type questionnaires are available, of varying quality, measuring dimensions relating to pharmacists’ technical competence, behavioural impressions and general satisfaction. For example, an often cited paper by Larson[2] uses two factors to measure satisfaction, namely ‘friendly explanation’ and ‘managing therapy’; the factors are highly interrelated and the questions somewhat awkwardly phrased, but more importantly, we believe the questionnaire excludes some specific domains unique to the MUR. By conducting patient interviews with recent MUR recipients, we have been working to identify relevant concepts and develop a conceptual framework to inform item development for a Patient Reported Outcome Measure questionnaire bespoke to the MUR. We note with interest the recent launch of a multidisciplinary audit template by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (RPSGB) in an attempt to review the effectiveness of MURs and improve their quality.[3] This template includes an MUR ‘patient survey’. We will discuss this ‘patient survey’ in light of our work and existing patient satisfaction with pharmacy questionnaires, outlining a new conceptual framework as a basis for measuring patient satisfaction with the MUR. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the NHS Surrey Research Ethics Committee on 2 June 2008. References 1. Department of Health (2008). Pharmacy in England: Building on Strengths – Delivering the Future. London: HMSO. www. official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7341/7341.pdf (accessed 29 September 2009). 2. Larson LN et al. Patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical care: update of a validated instrument. JAmPharmAssoc 2002; 42: 44–50. 3. Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (2009). Pharmacy Medicines Use Review – Patient Audit. London: RPSGB. http:// qi4pd.org.uk/index.php/Medicines-Use-Review-Patient-Audit. html (accessed 29 September 2009).

Cumulative long-term safety, efficacy and patient-reported outcomes in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis treated with intravenous abatacept: up to 7 years of treatment

The long-term efficacy and safety of intravenous abatacept in patients (pts) with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) have been reported previously from the Phase III AWAKEN trial ([1, 2]). Here, we report efficacy, safety and pt-reported outcomes from the open-label, long-term extension (LTE) of AWAKEN, with up to 7 years of follow-up. Pts entered the LTE if they were JIA ACR 30 non-responders (NR) at the end of the 4-month lead-in period (abatacept only), or if they received abatacept or placebo (pbo) in the 6-month double-blind (DB) period. The Child Health Questionnaire was used to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL); physical (PhS) and psychosocial (PsS) summary and pain scores were analyzed. Pain was assessed by parent global assessment using a 100 mm visual analog scale. Efficacy and HRQoL evaluations are reported up to Day 1765 (~ Year 5.5). Safety is presented for the cumulative period (lead-in, DB and LTE), for all pts who received abatacept during the LTE. Of the 153 pts entering the LTE (58 from DB abatacept group, 59 from DB pbo group, 36 NR), 69 completed the trial (29 abatacept, 27 pbo, 13 NR). For pts treated in the LTE, mean (range) exposure to abatacept was 53.6 (5.6–85.6) months. During the LTE, incidence rates of AEs and serious AEs per 100 pt-years were 209.1 and 5.6. Thirty pts (19.6%) had serious AEs; most were unrelated and were musculoskeletal (8.5%) or infectious events (6.5%). No malignancy was reported. There was one death (accidental; unrelated). At Day 169, JIA ACR 50 and 70 response rates were 79.3% and 55.2% in the abatacept group, and 52.5% and 30.5% in the pbo group; 31.0% and 10.2% of pts in the abatacept and pbo groups, respectively, had inactive disease. By Day 1765, JIA ACR 50 and 70 response rates were 93.9% and 78.8% in the abatacept group, and 80.0% and 63.3% in the pbo group; 51.5% and 33.3% had inactive disease. In the NR group, 69.2% and 53.8% of pts achieved JIA ACR 50 and 70 responses at Day 1765, and 30.8% had inactive disease. In pts who entered the LTE, mean baseline PhS scores were below the range for healthy children (abatacept 30.2, pbo 31.0, NR 29.5). At Day 169, 38.3% of pts had reached a PhS score >50 ((1). By the end of the LTE, 43.5% of pts had reached a PhS score >50. At baseline, mean PsS scores for those who entered the LTE were slightly lower than the mean for healthy children (abatacept 43.5, pbo 44.2, NR 47.0). At Day 169, 54.9% of pts had a PsS score >50 (1). By Day 1765, 58.1% of pts had reached a PsS score >50. At baseline, the mean pain score was 42.9. By Day 169, 13.9% of pts were considered pain free (pain score = 0); this was maintained over the LTE (1).

Frequency of and predictors for patient-reported medical and medication errors in Switzerland

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the frequency of and identify risk factors for patient-reported medical errors in Switzerland. The joint effect of risk factors on error-reporting probability was modelled for hypothetical patients. METHODS: A representative population sample of Swiss citizens (n = 1306) was surveyed as part of the Commonwealth Fund’s 2010 lnternational Survey of the General Public’s Views of their Health Care System’s Performance in Eleven Countries. Data on personal background, utilisation of health care, coordination of care problems and reported errors were assessed. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify risk factors for patients’ reports of medical mistakes and medication errors. RESULTS: 11.4% of participants reported at least one error in their care in the previous two years (8% medical errors, 5.3% medication errors). Poor coordination of care experiences was frequent. 7.8% experienced that test results or medical records were not available, 17.2% received conflicting information from care providers and 11.5% reported that tests were ordered although they had been done before. Age (OR = 0.98, p = 0.014), poor health (OR = 2.95, p = 0.007), utilisation of emergency care (OR = 2.45, p = 0.003), inpatient-stay (OR = 2.31, p = 0.010) and poor care coordination (OR = 5.43, p <0.001) are important predictors for reporting error. For high utilisers of care that unify multiple risk factors the probability that errors are reported rises up to p = 0.8. CONCLUSIONS: Patient safety remains a major challenge for the Swiss health care system. Despite the health related and economic burden associated with it, the widespread experience of medical error in some subpopulations also has the potential to erode trust in the health care system as a whole.

Patient-reported outcomes of patients with advanced biliary tract cancers receiving gemcitabine plus capecitabine: a multicenter, phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of palliative chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus capecitabine (GemCap) on patient-reported outcomes measured using clinical benefit response (CBR) and quality-of-life (QOL) measures in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had to manifest symptoms of advanced biliary tract cancer and have at least one of the following: impaired Karnofsky performance score (60 to 80), average analgesic consumption >or= 10 mg of morphine equivalents per day, and average pain intensity score of >or= 20 mm out of 100 mm. Treatment consisted of oral capecitabine 650 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 through 14 plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) as a 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks until progression. The primary end point was the number of patients categorized as having a CBR or stable CBR (SCBR) during the first three treatment cycles. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were enrolled (bile duct cancer, n = 36; gallbladder cancers, n = 8). The main grade 3 or 4 adverse events included hematologic toxicity and fatigue. After three cycles, 36% of patients achieved a CBR, and 34% achieved an SCBR. Over the full course of treatment, 57% of patients achieved a CBR, and 18% achieved an SCBR. Improved QOL was observed in patients with a CBR or SCBR. The objective response rate was 25%. Median time to progression and overall survival times were 7.2 months and 13.2 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy with GemCap is well tolerated and effective and leads to a high CBR rate. Patient-reported outcomes are useful for evaluating the effects of palliative chemotherapy in patients with biliary tract cancer.

Is a change in patient-reported dysphagia after induction chemotherapy in locally advanced esophageal cancer a predictive factor for pathological response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation?

GOALS OF WORK: In patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer, only those responding to the treatment ultimately benefit from preoperative chemoradiation. We investigated whether changes in subjective dysphagia or eating restrictions after two cycles of induction chemotherapy can predict histopathological tumor response observed after chemoradiation. In addition, we examined general long-term quality of life (QoL) and, in particular, eating restrictions after esophagectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with resectable, locally advanced squamous cell- or adenocarcinoma of the esophagus were treated with two cycles of chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery. They were asked to complete the EORTC oesophageal-specific QoL module (EORTC QLQ-OES24), and linear analogue self-assessment QoL indicators, before and during neoadjuvant therapy and quarterly until 1 year postoperatively. A median change of at least eight points was considered as clinically meaningful. MAIN RESULTS: Clinically meaningful improvements in the median scores for dysphagia and eating restrictions were found during induction chemotherapy. These improvements were not associated with a histopathological response observed after chemoradiation, but enhanced treatment compliance. Postoperatively, dysphagia scores remained low at 1 year, while eating restrictions persisted more frequently in patients with extended transthoracic resection compared to those with limited transhiatal resection. CONCLUSIONS: The improvement of dysphagia and eating restrictions after induction chemotherapy did not predict tumor response observed after chemoradiation. One year after esophagectomy, dysphagia was a minor problem, and global QoL was rather good. Eating restrictions persisted depending on the surgical technique used.

Frequency of patient-reported infections among sicker adults in high-income countries: an international perspective

The frequency of patient-reported health care-associated infections across several high-income countries was analyzed in representative population samples based on data from "The Commonwealth Fund's 2011 International Survey of Sicker Adults in Eleven countries." Across countries, 8.9% of patients who were hospitalized and/or had surgery reported an infection, but this rate varied considerably from 5.3% in the United States to 11.9% in New Zealand. Patients who reported infection were more likely to rate the quality of medical care received as fair or poor (odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9-3.1, P < .001). Female sex (OR, 1.2; 95% CI: 1.0-1.5, P = .027), reporting 2 or more chronic conditions (OR, 1.5; 95% CI: 1.1-2.0, P = .004), poor health (OR, 1.6; 95% CI: 1.2-2.1, P < .001), and surgery (OR, 1.8; 95% CI: 1.4-2.3, P < .001) were significant predictors for health care-associated infection across countries. Being above 64 years of age (OR, 0.78; 95% CI: 0.64-0.95, P = .013) and day-surgery (OR, 0.62; 95% CI: 0.48-0.79, P < .001) decreased the likelihood for reporting infection.

Patient-reported outcomes in meta-analyses - part 2: methods for improving interpretability for decision-makers

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials that include patient-reported outcomes (PROs) often provide crucial information for patients, clinicians and policy-makers facing challenging health care decisions. Based on emerging methods, guidance on improving the interpretability of meta-analysis of patient-reported outcomes, typically continuous in nature, is likely to enhance decision-making. The objective of this paper is to summarize approaches to enhancing the interpretability of pooled estimates of PROs in meta-analyses. When differences in PROs between groups are statistically significant, decision-makers must be able to interpret the magnitude of effect. This is challenging when, as is often the case, clinical trial investigators use different measurement instruments for the same construct within and between individual randomized trials. For such cases, in addition to pooling results as a standardized mean difference, we recommend that systematic review authors use other methods to present results such as relative (relative risk, odds ratio) or absolute (risk difference) dichotomized treatment effects, complimented by presentation in either: natural units (e.g. overall depression reduced by 2.4 points when measured on a 50-point Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression); minimal important difference units (e.g. where 1.0 unit represents the smallest difference in depression that patients, on average, perceive as important the depression score was 0.38 (95%CI 0.30 to 0.47) units less than the control group); or a ratio of means (e.g. where the mean in the treatment group is divided by the mean in the control group, the ratio of means is 1.27, representing a 27%relative reduction in the mean depression score).

Patient-reported outcomes of maxillary implant-supported overdentures compared with conventional dentures

OBJECTIVE The aim of the present prospective clinical study was to compare patient-reported outcomes for maxillary conventional dentures and maxillary implant-supported dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS Twenty-one patients (6 women and 15 men) being edentulous in the maxilla and encountering problems with their existing dentures were included. Twelve patients (4 women and 8 men) received a new set of conventional dentures, due to insufficient dentures. In nine patients (2 women and 7 men), the existing dentures were adjusted by means of relining or rebasing. All patients received implant-supported dentures on two retentive anchors. In total, 42 implants were inserted in the anterior maxilla. The participants rated their satisfaction on their existing conventional dentures, 2 months after insertion of new conventional dentures and 2 months after insertion of implant-supported dentures. Thereby, patients responded to questionnaires capturing the oral health impact profile (OHIP) using visual analog scales. Seven domains (functional limitation, physical pain, psychological discomfort, physical, psychological and social disability and handicap) were assessed. Higher scores implied poorer patient satisfaction. In addition, the questionnaire involved the evaluation of cleaning ability, general satisfaction, speech, comfort, esthetics, stability, and chewing ability. Higher scores implied higher patient satisfaction. RESULTS Patient satisfaction significantly increased for implant-supported dentures compared with old dentures in all seven OHIP subgroups, as well as for cleaning ability, general satisfaction, ability to speak, comfort, esthetics, and stability (P < 0.05). The comparison of new conventional dentures and implant-supported dentures revealed a statistically significantly increased satisfaction for functional limitation (difference of 33.2 mm), psychological discomfort (difference of 36.7 mm), physical disability (difference of 36.3 mm), and social disability (difference of 23.5 mm), (P < 0.05). Additionally, general satisfaction, chewing ability, speech, and stability significantly improved in implant-supported dentures (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Within the limits of this study, maxillary dentures retained by two implants provided some significant short-term improvements over conventional dentures in oral- and health-related quality of life.

Risk factors for patient-reported medical errors in eleven countries

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to identify common risk factors for patient-reported medical errors across countries. In country-level analyses, differences in risks associated with error between health care systems were investigated. The joint effects of risks on error-reporting probability were modelled for hypothetical patients with different health care utilization patterns. DESIGN Data from the Commonwealth Fund's 2010 lnternational Survey of the General Public's Views of their Health Care System's Performance in 11 Countries. SETTING Representative population samples of 11 countries were surveyed (total sample = 19,738 adults). Utilization of health care, coordination of care problems and reported errors were assessed. Regression analyses were conducted to identify risk factors for patients' reports of medical, medication and laboratory errors across countries and in country-specific models. RESULTS Error was reported by 11.2% of patients but with marked differences between countries (range: 5.4-17.0%). Poor coordination of care was reported by 27.3%. The risk of patient-reported error was determined mainly by health care utilization: Emergency care (OR = 1.7, P < 0.001), hospitalization (OR = 1.6, P < 0.001) and the number of providers involved (OR three doctors = 2.0, P < 0.001) are important predictors. Poor care coordination is the single most important risk factor for reporting error (OR = 3.9, P < 0.001). Country-specific models yielded common and country-specific predictors for self-reported error. For high utilizers of care, the probability that errors are reported rises up to P = 0.68. CONCLUSIONS Safety remains a global challenge affecting many patients throughout the world. Large variability exists in the frequency of patient-reported error across countries. To learn from others' errors is not only essential within countries but may also prove a promising strategy internationally.

Influence of previous surgery on patient-rated outcome after surgery for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine.

PURPOSE Few studies have used multivariate models to quantify the effect of multiple previous spine surgeries on patient-oriented outcome after spine surgery. This study sought to quantify the effect of prior spine surgery on 12-month postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for different degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine. METHODS The study included 4940 patients with lumbar degenerative disease documented in the Spine Tango Registry of EUROSPINE, the Spine Society of Europe, from 2004 to 2015. Preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively, patients completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI; 0-10 scale). Patients' medical history and surgical details were recorded using the Spine Tango Surgery 2006 and 2011 forms. Multiple linear regression models were used to investigate the relationship between the number of previous surgeries and the 12-month postoperative COMI score, controlling for the baseline COMI score and other potential confounders. RESULTS In the adjusted model including all cases, the 12-month COMI score showed a 0.37-point worse value [95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) 0.29-0.45; p < 0.001] for each additional prior spine surgery. In the subgroup of patients with lumbar disc herniation, the corresponding effect was 0.52 points (95 % CI 0.27-0.77; p < 0.001) and in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis, 0.40 points (95 % CI 0.17-0.64; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS We were able to demonstrate a clear "dose-response" effect for previous surgery: the greater the number of prior spine surgeries, the systematically worse the outcome at 12 months' follow-up. The results of this study can be used when considering or consenting a patient for further surgery, to better inform the patient of the likely outcome and to set realistic expectations.