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.

Does immediate loading affect clinical and patient-centered outcomes of mandibular 2-unsplinted-implant overdenture? : a 2-year within-case analysis

Objective To provide 2-year clinical- and patient-oriented data with regard to mandibular overdenture assisted by 2 immediately loaded unsplinted implants. Material and methods In this pre-post design, Phase-I clinical trial, 18 edentate individuals (62.4 ± 7.7 years) received a new set of complete denture. Then, following standard procedures, 3 threaded implants (OsseoSpeed TX™, Dentsply Implants, Mölndal, Sweden) were placed in the mandible in each patient, and locator abutments (Zest Anchors LLC, Escondido, U.S.A.) were inserted on the right and left side implants. The midline implant served as a control for within-patient comparison. The immediate loading was conducted within 24 h of surgery. Data were collected at baseline (T0), 12 (T1) and 24 (T2) months after immediate loading. The clinical outcomes included implant survival rate, crestal bone level changes and implant stability. These criteria were assessed through clinical and radiographic examinations as well as resonance frequency analysis. Patient-centered outcomes included patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life measured using validated questionnaires. Brunner-Langer approach was used for statistical analysis. Results Implant survival rate for immediate loaded implants was 91.7% at 2-year follow-up. None of the unloaded implants failed. There was no statistically significant difference at baseline and follow-ups with regard to clinical outcomes between loaded and unloaded implants. Patient satisfaction and quality of life improved (p < 0.0001) from baseline to 2-year follow-up. Conclusion Immediate loading protocol did not negatively affect clinical outcomes, satisfaction and quality of life of patients wearing 2-unsplinted-implant mandibular overdenture for 2 years. This conclusion requires confirmation by randomized control trials. Clinical significance statement Mandibular overdenture assisted by two immediately-loaded unsplinted implants is successful treatment based on 2-year clinical and patient-based outcomes.

Does immediate loading affect clinical and patient-centered outcomes of mandibular 2-unsplinted-implant overdenture? : a 2-year within-case analysis

Objective To provide 2-year clinical- and patient-oriented data with regard to mandibular overdenture assisted by 2 immediately loaded unsplinted implants. Material and methods In this pre-post design, Phase-I clinical trial, 18 edentate individuals (62.4 ± 7.7 years) received a new set of complete denture. Then, following standard procedures, 3 threaded implants (OsseoSpeed TX™, Dentsply Implants, Mölndal, Sweden) were placed in the mandible in each patient, and locator abutments (Zest Anchors LLC, Escondido, U.S.A.) were inserted on the right and left side implants. The midline implant served as a control for within-patient comparison. The immediate loading was conducted within 24 h of surgery. Data were collected at baseline (T0), 12 (T1) and 24 (T2) months after immediate loading. The clinical outcomes included implant survival rate, crestal bone level changes and implant stability. These criteria were assessed through clinical and radiographic examinations as well as resonance frequency analysis. Patient-centered outcomes included patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life measured using validated questionnaires. Brunner-Langer approach was used for statistical analysis. Results Implant survival rate for immediate loaded implants was 91.7% at 2-year follow-up. None of the unloaded implants failed. There was no statistically significant difference at baseline and follow-ups with regard to clinical outcomes between loaded and unloaded implants. Patient satisfaction and quality of life improved (p < 0.0001) from baseline to 2-year follow-up. Conclusion Immediate loading protocol did not negatively affect clinical outcomes, satisfaction and quality of life of patients wearing 2-unsplinted-implant mandibular overdenture for 2 years. This conclusion requires confirmation by randomized control trials. Clinical significance statement Mandibular overdenture assisted by two immediately-loaded unsplinted implants is successful treatment based on 2-year clinical and patient-based outcomes.

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).

Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement

Background: In clinical trials, at the group level, results are usually reported as mean and standard deviation of the change in score, which is not meaningful for most readers. Objective: To determine the minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) of pain, patient's global assessment of disease activity, and functional impairment in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: A prospective multicentre 4 week cohort study involving 1362 outpatients with knee or hip OA was carried out. Data on assessment of pain and patient's global assessment, measured on visual analogue scales, and functional impairment, measured on the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) function subscale, were collected at baseline and final visits. Patients assessed their response to treatment on a five point Likert scale at the final visit. An anchoring method based on the patient's opinion was used. The MCII was estimated in a subgroup of 814 patients ( 603 with knee OA, 211 with hip OA). Results: For knee and hip OA, MCII for absolute ( and relative) changes were, respectively, ( a) -19.9 mm (-40.8%) and -15.3 mm (-32.0%) for pain; ( b) -18.3 mm ( - 39.0%) and -15.2 mm ( -32.6%) for patient's global assessment; ( c) -9.1 ( -26.0%) and -7.9 ( -21.1%) for WOMAC function subscale score. The MCII is affected by the initial degree of severity of the symptoms but not by age, disease duration, or sex. Conclusion: Using criteria such as MCII in clinical trials would provide meaningful information which would help in interpreting the results by expressing them as a proportion of improved patients.

Evaluation of clinically relevant states in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the patient acceptable symptom state

Background: The patient acceptable symptom state ( PASS) is the value beyond which patients can consider themselves well. This concept can help in interpreting results of clinical trials. Objective: To determine the PASS estimate for patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) by assessing pain, patient's global assessment of disease activity, and functional impairment. Methods: A 4 week prospective multicentre cohort study of 1362 outpatients with knee or hip OA was carried out. Data on assessment of pain and patient's global assessment of disease, measured on visual analogue scales, and functional impairment, measured on the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) function subscale, were collected at baseline and final visits. The patients assessed their satisfaction with their current state at the final visit. An anchoring method based on the patient's opinion was used. Results: For patients with knee and hip OA, the estimates of PASS were, respectively, 32.3 and 35.0 mm for pain, 32.0 and 34.6 mm for patient global assessment of disease activity, and 31.0 and 34.4 points for WOMAC function score. The PASS varied moderately across the tertiles of baseline scores but not across age, disease duration, or sex. Conclusion: The use of PASS in clinical trials would provide more meaningful results expressed as a proportion of patients in an acceptable symptom state.

Tradução e adaptação transcultural do domínio função física do Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System – PROMIS® - versão para a língua portuguesa

In 2004, the National Institutes of Health made available the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System – PROMIS®, which is constituted of innovative item banks for health assessment. It is based on classical, reliable Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and includes advanced statistical methods, such as Item Response Theory and Computerized Adaptive Test. One of PROMIS® Domain Frameworks is the Physical Function, whose item bank need to be translated and culturally adapted so it can be used in Portuguese speaking countries. This work aimed to translate and culturally adapt the PROMIS® Physical Function item bank into Portuguese. FACIT (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy) translation methodology, which is constituted of eight stages for translation and cultural adaptation, was used. Fifty subjects above the age of 18 years participated in the pre-test (seventh stage). The questionnaire was answered by the participants (self-reported questionnaires) by using think aloud protocol, and cognitive and retrospective interviews. In FACIT methodology, adaptations can be done since the beginning of the translation and cultural adaption process, ensuring semantic, conceptual, cultural, and operational equivalences of the Physical Function Domain. During the pre-test, 24% of the subjects had difficulties understanding the items, 22% of the subjects suggested changes to improve understanding. The terms and concepts of the items were totally understood (100%) in 87% of the items. Only four items had less than 80% of understanding; for this reason, it was necessary to chance them so they could have correspondence with the original item and be understood by the subjects, after retesting. The process of translation and cultural adaptation of the PROMIS® Physical Function item bank into Portuguese was successful. This version of the assessment tool must have its psychometric properties validated before being made available for clinical use.

Patient based method of assessing adverse events in clinical trials in rheumatology: the revised Stanford Toxicity Index

We describe the progress towards developing a patient rated toxicity index that meets all of the patient-important attributes defined by the OMERACT Drug Safety Working Party, These attributes are frequency, severity. importance to patient, importance to the clinician, impact on economics, impact on activities, and integration of adverse effects with benefits. The Stanford Toxicity Index (STI) has been revised to collect all attributes with the exception of impact on activities. However, since the STI is a part of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). impact on activities is collected by the HAQ. In particular, a new question asks patients to rate overall satisfaction, taking into consideration both benefits and adverse effects. The nest step in the development of this tool is to ensure that the STI meets the OMERACT filter of truth, discrimination, and feasibility. Although truth and feasibility have been confirmed by comparisons within the ARAMIS database, discrimination needs to be assessed in clinical trials.

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.

Are clinical documents optimised for patient safety? A critical analysis of patient safety outcomes using the EDA error model

Iatrogenic errors and patient safety in clinical processes are an increasing concern. The quality of process information in hardcopy or electronic form can heavily influence clinical behaviour and decision making errors. Little work has been undertaken to assess the safety impact of clinical process planning documents guiding the clinical actions and decisions. This paper investigates the clinical process documents used in elective surgery and their impact on latent and active clinical errors. Eight clinicians from a large health trust underwent extensive semi- structured interviews to understand their use of clinical documents, and their perceived impact on errors and patient safety. Samples of the key types of document used were analysed. Theories of latent organisational and active errors from the literature were combined with the EDA semiotics model of behaviour and decision making to propose the EDA Error Model. This model enabled us to identify perceptual, evaluation, knowledge and action error types and approaches to reducing their causes. The EDA error model was then used to analyse sample documents and identify error sources and controls. Types of knowledge artefact structures used in the documents were identified and assessed in terms of safety impact. This approach was combined with analysis of the questionnaire findings using existing error knowledge from the literature. The results identified a number of document and knowledge artefact issues that give rise to latent and active errors and also issues concerning medical culture and teamwork together with recommendations for further work.

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).