Late-stage, primary open-angle glaucoma in Europe:Social and health care maintenance costs and quality of life of patients from 4 countries

Objective: The purpose of this study was to estimate costs and quality of life (QoL) of late-stage glaucoma patients in 4 European countries. Methods: Retrospective review of medical charts of patients with POAG who were followed in a low-vision or vision rehabilitation center in one of 4 countries for at least 1 year was used to determine patient characteristics, health status, and health care resource use. Visual impairment was measured by best-corrected visual acuity (Snellen score). Patients were also interviewed over the telephone in order to assess their health-related QoL (using EuroQol EQ-5D) and use of resources including: the number of visits to rehabilitation centers, visits to hospital and non-hospital specialists, the use of low-vision devices, medication, tests, and the use of hired home help. The costs associated with resource use were calculated from the perspective of a third-party payer of health and social care based on resource usage and unit costs in each country. Results: Patients undergoing visual rehabilitation in France (n=21), Denmark (n=59), Germany (n=60), and the United Kingdom (n=22) were identified, interviewed and had their medical charts reviewed. Annual maintenance costs of late-stage glaucoma amounted to €830 (±445) on average. Average home help costs were more than 3 times higher. QoL, on average, was 0.65 (±0.28). QoL was positively correlated with the level of visual acuity in the patients' best eye. On the other hand, visual acuity was also positively correlated to health care costs, but negatively correlated to costs of home help. Conclusions: The study was limited by its observational, uncontrolled design. The finding that late-stage glaucoma is associated with higher home help costs than health care maintenance costs suggests that potential savings from a better preventive treatment are to be found for social care payers rather than health care payers. © 2008 Informa UK Ltd All rights reserved.

The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies in glaucoma using the Heidelberg retina tomograph

PURPOSE. Scanning laser tomography with the Heidelberg retina tomograph (HRT; Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany) has been proposed as a useful diagnostic test for glaucoma. This study was conducted to evaluate the quality of reporting of published studies using the HRT for diagnosing glaucoma. METHODS. A validated Medline and hand search of English-language articles reporting on measures of diagnostic accuracy of the HRT for glaucoma was performed. Two reviewers selected and appraised the papers independently. The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) checklist was used to evaluate the quality of each publication. RESULTS. A total of 29 articles were included. Interobserver rating agreement was observed in 83% of items (? = 0.76). The number of STARD items properly reported ranged from 5 to 18. Less than a third of studies (7/29) explicitly reported more than half of the STARD items. Descriptions of key aspects of the methodology were frequently missing. For example, the design of the study (prospective or retrospective) was reported in 6 of 29 studies, and details of participant sampling (e.g., consecutive or random selection) were described in 5 of 29 publications. The commonest description of diagnostic accuracy was sensitivity and specificity (25/29) followed by area under the ROC curve (13/29), with 9 of 29 publications reporting both. CONCLUSIONS. The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy tests for glaucoma with HRT is suboptimal. The STARD initiative may be a useful tool for appraising the strengths and weaknesses of diagnostic accuracy studies. Copyright © Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.

The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies published in ophthalmic journals

Aim: To evaluate the quality of reporting of all diagnostic studies published in five major ophthalmic journals in the year 2002 using the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) initiative parameters. Methods: Manual searching was used to identify diagnostic studies published in 2002 in five leading ophthalmic journals, the American Journal of Ophthalmology (AJO), Archives of Ophthalmology (Archives), British Journal of Ophthalmology (BJO), Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (IOVS), and Ophthalmology. The STARD checklist of 25 items and flow chart was used to evaluate the quality of each publication. Results: A total of 16 publications were included (AJO = 5, Archives = 1, BJO = 2, IOVS = 2, and Ophthalmology = 6). More than half of the studies (n = 9) were related to glaucoma diagnosis. Other specialties included retina (n = 4) cornea (n = 2), and neuro-ophthalmology (n = 1). The most common description of diagnostic accuracy was sensitivity and specificity values, published in 13 articles. The number of fully reported items in evaluated studies ranged from eight to 19. Seven studies reported more than 50% of the STARD items. Conclusions: The current standards of reporting of diagnostic accuracy tests are highly variable. The STARD initiative may be a useful tool for appraising the strengths and weaknesses of diagnostic accuracy studies.

The Quality of Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies of Optical Coherence Tomography in Glaucoma

Objective: To evaluate the quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in glaucoma. Design: Descriptive series of published studies. Participants: Published studies reporting a measure of the diagnostic accuracy of OCT for glaucoma. Methods: Review of English language papers reporting measures of diagnostic accuracy of OCT for glaucoma. Papers were identified from a Medline literature search performed in June 2006. Articles were appraised using the 25 items provided by the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) initiative. Each item was recorded as full, partially, or not reported. Main Outcome Measures: Degree of compliance with the STARD guidelines. Results: Thirty papers were appraised. Eight papers (26.7%) fully reported more than half of the STARD items. The lowest number of fully reported items in a study was 5 and the highest was 17. Descriptions of key aspects of methodology frequently were missing. For example, details of participant sampling (e.g., consecutive or random selection) were described in only 8 (26.7%) of 30 publications. Measures of statistical uncertainty were reported in 18 (60%) of 30 publications. No single STARD item was fully reported by all the papers. Conclusions: The standard of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies in glaucoma using OCT was suboptimal. It is hoped that adoption of the STARD guidelines will lead to an improvement in reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies, enabling clearer evidence to be produced for the usefulness of OCT for the diagnosis of glaucoma. © 2007 American Academy of Ophthalmology.

Testing a model for developing, implementing and evaluating a strategy to improve the quality of nursing and midwifery care in an acute hospital trust.

Abstract:
Background: Health care organisations
worldwide are faced with the need to develop
and implement strategic organisational plans
to meet the challenges of modern health care.
There is a need for models for developing, implementing and evaluating strategic plans that engage practitioners, and make a measurable difference to the patients that they serve. These presentations describe the development, implementation and evaluation of such a model by a team of senior nurses and practice developers, to underpin a strategy for nursing and midwifery in an acute hospital trust. Developing a Strategy The PARIHS (Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) conceptual framework (Kitson et al, 1998) proposes that successful implementation of change in practice is a function of the interplay of three core elements: the level of evidence supporting the proposed change; the context or environment in which the change takes place, and the way in which change is facilitated. We chose to draw on this framework to develop our strategy and implementation plan (O’Halloran, Martin and Connolly, 2005). At the centre of the plan are ward managers. These professionals provide leadership for the majority of staff in the trust and so were seen to be a key group in the implementation process.

Lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) delivered over 4 or 11days: A comparison of acute toxicity and quality of life.

Abstract
PURPOSE:
The optimal duration over which lung SBRT should be delivered is unknown. We conducted a randomized pilot study in patients treated with four fractions of lung SBRT delivered over 4 or over 11days.
METHODS:
Patients with a peripheral solitary lung tumor (NSCLC or pulmonary metastasis) ?5cm were eligible. For NSCLC lung tumors ?3cm, a dose of 48Gy in 4 fractions was used, otherwise 52Gy in 4 fractions was delivered. Patients were randomized to receive treatment over 4 consecutive days or over 11days. The primary end-point was acute grade ?2 toxicity. Secondary end-points included quality of life (QOL) assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 questionnaires.
RESULTS:
Fifty four patients were enrolled. More patients in the 11day group had respiratory symptoms at baseline. 55.6% patients treated over 4days and 33.3% of patients treated over 11days experienced acute grade ?2 toxicity (p=0.085). Dyspnea, fatigue and coughing domains were worse in the 11day group at baseline. At 1 and 4months, more patients in the 4day group experienced a clinically meaningful worsening in the dyspnea QOL domain compared to the 11day group (44.5% vs 15.4%, p=0.02; 38.5% vs 12.0%, p=0.03, respectively). However, raw QOL scores were not different at these time-points between treatment groups.
CONCLUSIONS:
Grade 2 or higher acute toxicity was more common in the 4day group, approaching statistical significance. More patients treated on 4 consecutive days reported a clinically meaningful increase in dyspnea, although interpretation of these results is challenging due to baseline imbalance between treatment groups. Larger studies are required to validate these results.