What is important for you? A qualitative interview study of living with diabetes and experiences of diabetes care to establish a basis for a tailored Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for the Swedish National Diabetes Register

OBJECTIVES: There is a growing emphasis on the perspective of individuals living with diabetes and the need for a more person-centred diabetes care. At present, the Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR) lacks patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) based on the perspective of the patient. As a basis for a new PROM, the aim of this study was to describe important aspects in life for adult individuals with diabetes. DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative interviews analysed using content analysis. SETTING: Hospital-based outpatient clinics and primary healthcare clinics in Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: 29 adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) (n=15) and type 2 DM (n=14). INCLUSION CRITERIA: Swedish adults (≥18 years) living with type 1 DM or type 2 DM (duration ≥5 years) able to describe their situation in Swedish. Purposive sampling generated heterogeneous characteristics. RESULTS: To live a good life with diabetes is demanding for the individual, but experienced barriers can be eased by support from others in the personal sphere, and by professional support from diabetes care. Diabetes care was a crucial resource to nurture the individual's ability and knowledge to manage diabetes, and to facilitate life with diabetes by supplying support, guidance, medical treatment and technical devices tailored to individual needs. The analysis resulted in the overarching theme 'To live a good life with diabetes' constituting the two main categories 'How I feel and how things are going with my diabetes' and 'Support from diabetes care in managing diabetes' including five different categories. CONCLUSIONS: Common aspects were identified including the experience of living with diabetes and support from diabetes care. These will be used to establish a basis for a tailored PROM for the NDR.

A patient-reported outcome measure to identify occurrence and distress of post-surgery symptoms of WOMen with vulvAr Neoplasia (WOMAN-PRO) - a cross sectional study.

OBJECTIVE The aim of the study was to describe the (a) symptom experience of women with vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia and vulvar cancer (vulvar neoplasia) during the first week after hospital discharge, and (b) associations between age, type of disease, stage of disease, the extent of surgical treatment and symptom experience. METHODS This cross-sectional study was conducted in eight hospitals in Germany and Switzerland (Clinical Trial ID: NCT01300663). Symptom experience after surgical treatment in women with vulvar neoplasia was measured with our newly developed WOMAN-PRO instrument. Outpatients (n=65) rated 31 items. We used descriptive statistics and regression analysis. RESULTS The average number of symptoms reported per patient was 20.2 (SD 5.77) with a range of 5 to 31 symptoms. The three most prevalent wound-related symptoms were 'swelling' (n=56), 'drainage' (n=54) and 'pain' (n=52). The three most prevalent difficulties in daily life were 'sitting' (n=63), 'wearing clothes' (n=56) and 'carrying out my daily activities' (n=51). 'Tiredness' (n=62), 'insecurity' (n=54) and 'feeling that my body has changed' (n=50) were the three most prevalent psychosocial symptoms/issues. The most distressing symptoms were 'sitting' (Mean 2.03, SD 0.88), 'open spot (e.g. opening of skin or suture)' (Mean 1.91, SD 0.93), and 'carrying out my daily activities' (Mean 1.86, SD 0.87), which were on average reported as 'quite a bit' distressing. Negative associations were found between psychosocial symptom experience and age. CONCLUSIONS WOMAN-PRO data showed a high symptom prevalence and distress, call for a comprehensive symptom assessment, and may allow identification of relevant areas in symptom management.

The Responsiveness, Content Validity, and Convergent Validity of the Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW) Patient-Reported Outcome Measure

Objective Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW) is a patient-centred questionnaire that allows cancer patients to identify and quantify the severity of their ‘Concerns’ and Wellbeing, as opposed to using a pre-determined list. MYCaW administration is brief and aids in prioritising treatment approaches. Our goal was to assess the convergent validity and responsiveness of MYCaW scores over time, the generalisability of the existing qualitative coding framework in different complementary and integrative healthcare settings and content validity. Methods Baseline and 6-week follow-up data (n=82) from MYCaW and FACIT-SpEx questionnaires were collected for a service evaluation of the ‘Living Well With The Impact of Cancer’ course at Penny Brohn Cancer Care. MYCaW construct validity was determined using Spearman's Rank Correlation test, and responsiveness indices assessed score changes over time. The existing qualitative coding framework was reviewed using a new dataset (n=158) and coverage of concern categories compared to items of existing outcome measures. Results Good correlation between MYCaW and FACIT-SpEx score changes were achieved (r= -0.57, p≥0.01). MYCaW Profile and Concern scores were highly responsive to change: SRM=1.02 and 1.08; effect size=1.26 and 1.22. MYCaW change scores showed the anticipated gradient of change according to clinically relevant degrees of change. Categories including ‘Spirituality’, ‘weight change’ and ‘practical concerns’ were added to the coding framework to improve generalisability. Conclusions MYCaW scores were highly responsive to change, allowing personalized patient outcomes to be quantified; the qualitative coding framework is generalisable across different oncology settings and has broader coverage of patient-identified concerns compared with existing cancer-related patient-reported outcome measures.

Health-related quality of life in portuguese SLE patients: an outcome measure independent of disease activity and cumulative damage

PURPOSE: To evaluate quality of life in Portuguese patients with Systemic Lupus Erithematosus (SLE) and its correlation with disease activity and cumulative damage. METHODS: We included consecutive SLE patients, fulfilling the 1997 ACR Classification Criteria for SLE and followed at the Rheumatology Department of the University Hospital of Coimbra, Portugal at time of visit to the outpatient clinic. Quality of life was evaluated using the patient self-assessment questionnaire Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 (SF-36) (validated Portuguese version). The consulting rheumatologist fulfilled the SLE associated indexes for cumulative damage (Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics- Damage Index: SLICC/ACR-DI) and disease activity (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index: SLEDAI 2000). Correlation between SLEDAI and SLICC and SF-36 was tested with the Spearman Coefficient. Significant level considered was 0.05. RESULTS: The study included 133 SLE patients (90.2% female, mean age - 40.7 years, mean disease duration - 8.7 years). Most patients presented low disease activity (mean SLEDAI = 4.23) and limited cumulative damage (mean SLICC = 0.76). Despite that, SF-36 mean scores were below 70% in all eight domains of the index. Physical function domains showed lower scores than mental function domains. The QoL in this group of patients is significantly impaired when compared with the reference Portuguese population (p<0.05 in all domains). There was no correlation between clinical activity or cumulative damage and quality of life. CONCLUSION: QoL is significantly compromised in this group of SLE patients, but not related with disease activity or damage. These findings suggest that disease activity, cumulative damage and QoL are independent outcome measures and should all be used to assess the full impact of disease in SLE patients.

A tool to measure progress and outcome in recovery

Recovery and the use of routine outcome measurement tools are key topics for mental health nurses. This article reports on research carried out to assess the usability of an outcome measure designed to assess recovery in clinical practice. Results indicate that the Individual Recovery Outcomes Counter (I.ROC) is both easy to use and well liked by services users.

Comparison of three systems of classification in predicting the outcome of diabetic foot ulcers in a Brazilian population

Objective: The aim was to compare there ulcer classification systems as predictors of the outcome of diabetic foot ulcers; the Wagner, the University of Texas (UT) and the size (area, depth), sepsis, arteriopathy, denervation system (S(AD)SAD) systems in specialist clinic in Brazil. Methods: Ulcer area, depth, appearance, infection and associated ischaemia and neuropathy were recorded in a consecutive series of 94 subjects. A novel score, the S(AD)SAD score, was derived from the sum of individual items of the S(AD)SAD system, and was evaluated. Follow-up was for at least 6 months. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of healing. Results: Mean age was 57.6 years; 57 (60.6%) were made. Forty-eight ulcers (51.1%) healed without surgery; 11 (12.2%) subjects underwent minor amputation. Significant differences in terms of healing were observed for depth (P = 0.002), infection (P = 0.006) and denervation (P = 0.002) using the S(AD)SAD system, for UT grade (P = 0.002) and stage (P = 0.032) and for Wagner grades (P = 0.002). Ulcers with an S(AD)SAD score of <= 9 (total possible 15) were 7.6 times more likely to heal than scores >= 10 (P < 0.001). Conclusions: All three systems predicted ulcer outcome. The S(AD)SAD score of ulcer severity could represent a useful addition to routine clinical practice. The association between outcome and ulcer depth confirms earlier reports. The association with infection was stronger than that reported from the centres in Europe or North America. The very strong association with neuropathy has only previously been observed in Tanzania. Studies designed to compare the outcome in different countries should adopt systems of classification, which are valid for the populations studied.

Quality of life: a potentially useful measure to indicate subclinical flares in Crohn disease.

Background:  While quality of life (QoL) is a well-recognised outcome measure of Crohn disease (CD) activity, its influence on other outcome measures, including exacerbation of CD is poorly understood. If QoL measures were to be associated with intestinal inflammatory activity, they might be useful for early detection of subclinical flares. Aims:  We hypothesised that low QoL might be associated with subsequent CD flares. Methods:  A cohort of 318 adult CD patients was observed for 1 year after assessment of baseline characteristics. Data were collected in Swiss university hospitals, regional hospitals and private practices. At inclusion, patients completed the Inflammatory Bowel Disease QoL Questionnaire (gastrointestinal QoL; range: 32 to 224 points) and the Short Form-36 Health Survey (general QoL; range: 35 to 145 points). During follow up, flares were recorded. Binary logistic regression was performed to estimate the relation between QoL and the odds of subsequent flares. Results:  A twofold decrease in the odds of flares (99% CI: 1.1; 4.0) per standard deviation of gastrointestinal QoL and a threefold decrease (99% CI: 1.5; 6.2) per standard deviation of general QoL were observed. Conclusions:  The close association between QoL and subsequent flares suggests that QoL measures might be useful in detecting upcoming flares before they become clinically apparent.

Predictors of nonresponse in a questionnaire-based outcome study of vocational rehabilitation patients.

OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of nonresponse to a self-report study of patients with orthopedic trauma hospitalized for vocational rehabilitation between November 15, 2003, and December 31, 2005. The role of biopsychosocial complexity, assessed using the INTERMED, was of particular interest. DESIGN: Cohort study. Questionnaires with quality of life, sociodemographic, and job-related questions were given to patients at hospitalization and 1 year after discharge. Sociodemographic data, biopsychosocial complexity, and presence of comorbidity were available at hospitalization (baseline) for all eligible patients. Logistic regression models were used to test a number of baseline variables as potential predictors of nonresponse to the questionnaires at each of the 2 time points. SETTING: Rehabilitation clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (N=990) hospitalized for vocational rehabilitation over a period of 2 years. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Nonresponse to the questionnaires was the binary dependent variable. RESULTS: Patients with high biopsychosocial complexity, foreign native language, or low educational level were less likely to respond at both time points. Younger patients were less likely to respond at 1 year. Those living in a stable partnership were less likely than singles to respond at hospitalization. Sex, psychiatric, and somatic comorbidity and alcoholism were never associated with nonresponse. CONCLUSIONS: We stress the importance of assessing biopsychosocial complexity to predict nonresponse. Furthermore, the factors we found to be predictive of nonresponse are also known to influence treatment outcome and vocational rehabilitation. Therefore, it is important to increase the response rate of the groups of concern in order to reduce selection bias in epidemiologic investigations.

Psychometric characteristics of the Spanish version of instruments to measure neck pain disability

BACKGROUND. The NDI, COM and NPQ are evaluation instruments for disability due to NP. There was no Spanish version of NDI or COM for which psychometric characteristics were known. The objectives of this study were to translate and culturally adapt the Spanish version of the Neck Disability Index Questionnaire (NDI), and the Core Outcome Measure (COM), to validate its use in Spanish speaking patients with non-specific neck pain (NP), and to compare their psychometric characteristics with those of the Spanish version of the Northwick Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). METHODS. Translation/re-translation of the English versions of the NDI and the COM was done blindly and independently by a multidisciplinary team. The study was done in 9 primary care Centers and 12 specialty services from 9 regions in Spain, with 221 acute, subacute and chronic patients who visited their physician for NP: 54 in the pilot phase and 167 in the validation phase. Neck pain (VAS), referred pain (VAS), disability (NDI, COM and NPQ), catastrophizing (CSQ) and quality of life (SF-12) were measured on their first visit and 14 days later. Patients' self-assessment was used as the external criterion for pain and disability. In the pilot phase, patients' understanding of each item in the NDI and COM was assessed, and on day 1 test-retest reliability was estimated by giving a second NDI and COM in which the name of the questionnaires and the order of the items had been changed. RESULTS. Comprehensibility of NDI and COM were good. Minutes needed to fill out the questionnaires [median, (P25, P75)]: NDI. 4 (2.2, 10.0), COM: 2.1 (1.0, 4.9). Reliability: [ICC, (95%CI)]: NDI: 0.88 (0.80, 0.93). COM: 0.85 (0.75,0.91). Sensitivity to change: Effect size for patients having worsened, not changed and improved between days 1 and 15, according to the external criterion for disability: NDI: -0.24, 0.15, 0.66; NPQ: -0.14, 0.06, 0.67; COM: 0.05, 0.19, 0.92. Validity: Results of NDI, NPQ and COM were consistent with the external criterion for disability, whereas only those from NDI were consistent with the one for pain. Correlations with VAS, CSQ and SF-12 were similar for NDI and NPQ (absolute values between 0.36 and 0.50 on day 1, between 0.38 and 0.70 on day 15), and slightly lower for COM (between 0.36 and 0.48 on day 1, and between 0.33 and 0.61 on day 15). Correlation between NDI and NPQ: r = 0.84 on day 1, r = 0.91 on day 15. Correlation between COM and NPQ: r = 0.63 on day 1, r = 0.71 on day 15. CONCLUSION. Although most psychometric characteristics of NDI, NPQ and COM are similar, those from the latter one are worse and its use may lead to patients' evolution seeming more positive than it actually is. NDI seems to be the best instrument for measuring NP-related disability, since its results are the most consistent with patient's assessment of their own clinical status and evolution. It takes two more minutes to answer the NDI than to answer the COM, but it can be reliably filled out by the patient without assistance. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinical Trials Register NCT00349544.

Factor analysis of the North American Spine Society outcome assessment instrument: a study based on a spine registry of patients treated with lumbar and cervical disc arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Studies involving factor analysis (FA) of the items in the North American Spine Society (NASS) outcome assessment instrument have revealed inconsistent factor structures for the individual items. PURPOSE: This study examined whether the factor structure of the NASS varied in relation to the severity of the back/neck problem and differed from that originally recommended by the developers of the questionnaire, by analyzing data before and after surgery in a large series of patients undergoing lumbar or cervical disc arthroplasty. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Prospective multicenter observational case series. PATIENT SAMPLE: Three hundred ninety-one patients with low back pain and 553 patients with neck pain completed questionnaires preoperatively and again at 3 to 6 and 12 months follow-ups (FUs), in connection with the SWISSspine disc arthroplasty registry. OUTCOME MEASURES: North American Spine Society outcome assessment instrument. METHODS: First, an exploratory FA without a priori assumptions and subsequently a confirmatory FA were performed on the 17 items of the NASS-lumbar and 19 items of the NASS-cervical collected at each assessment time point. The item-loading invariance was tested in the German version of the questionnaire for baseline and FU. RESULTS: Both NASS-lumbar and NASS-cervical factor structures differed between baseline and postoperative data sets. The confirmatory analysis and item-loading invariance showed better fit for a three-factor (3F) structure for NASS-lumbar, containing items on "disability," "back pain," and "radiating pain, numbness, and weakness (leg/foot)" and for a 5F structure for NASS-cervical including disability, "neck pain," "radiating pain and numbness (arm/hand)," "weakness (arm/hand)," and "motor deficit (legs)." CONCLUSIONS: The best-fitting factor structure at both baseline and FU was selected for both the lumbar- and cervical-NASS questionnaires. It differed from that proposed by the originators of the NASS instruments. Although the NASS questionnaire represents a valid outcome measure for degenerative spine diseases, it is able to distinguish among all major symptom domains (factors) in patients undergoing lumbar and cervical disc arthroplasty; overall, the item structure could be improved. Any potential revision of the NASS should consider its factorial structure; factorial invariance over time should be aimed for, to allow for more precise interpretations of treatment success.

Psychometric characteristics of the Spanish version of instruments to measure neck pain disability

Background: The NDI, COM and NPQ are evaluation instruments for disability due to NP. There was no Spanish version of NDI or COM for which psychometric characteristics were known. The objectives of this study were to translate and culturally adapt the Spanish version of the Neck Disability Index Questionnaire (NDI), and the Core Outcome Measure (COM), to validate its use in Spanish speaking patients with non-specific neck pain (NP), and to compare their psychometric characteristics with those of the Spanish version of the Northwick Pain Questionnaire (NPQ).Methods: Translation/re-translation of the English versions of the NDI and the COM was done blindly and independently by a multidisciplinary team. The study was done in 9 primary care Centers and 12 specialty services from 9 regions in Spain, with 221 acute, subacute and chronic patients who visited their physician for NP: 54 in the pilot phase and 167 in the validation phase. Neck pain (VAS), referred pain (VAS), disability (NDI, COM and NPQ), catastrophizing (CSQ) and quality of life (SF-12) were measured on their first visit and 14 days later. Patients' self-assessment was used as the external criterion for pain and disability. In the pilot phase, patients' understanding of each item in the NDI and COM was assessed, and on day 1 test-retest reliability was estimated by giving a second NDI and COM in which the name of the questionnaires and the order of the items had been changed.Results: Comprehensibility of NDI and COM were good. Minutes needed to fill out the questionnaires [median, (P25, P75)]: NDI. 4 (2.2, 10.0), COM: 2.1 (1.0, 4.9). Reliability: [ICC, (95%CI)]: NDI: 0.88 (0.80, 0.93). COM: 0.85 (0.75,0.91). Sensitivity to change: Effect size for patients having worsened, not changed and improved between days 1 and 15, according to the external criterion for disability: NDI: -0.24, 0.15, 0.66; NPQ: -0.14, 0.06, 0.67; COM: 0.05, 0.19, 0.92. Validity: Results of NDI, NPQ and COM were consistent with the external criterion for disability, whereas only those from NDI were consistent with the one for pain. Correlations with VAS, CSQ and SF-12 were similar for NDI and NPQ (absolute values between 0.36 and 0.50 on day 1, between 0.38 and 0.70 on day 15), and slightly lower for COM (between 0.36 and 0.48 on day 1, and between 0.33 and 0.61 on day 15). Correlation between NDI and NPQ: r = 0.84 on day 1, r = 0.91 on day 15. Correlation between COM and NPQ: r = 0.63 on day 1, r = 0.71 on day 15.Conclusion: Although most psychometric characteristics of NDI, NPQ and COM are similar, those from the latter one are worse and its use may lead to patients' evolution seeming more positive than it actually is. NDI seems to be the best instrument for measuring NP-related disability, since its results are the most consistent with patient's assessment of their own clinical status and evolution. It takes two more minutes to answer the NDI than to answer the COM, but it can be reliably filled out by the patient without assistance.

Current practice in neuropsychological outcome reporting after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Neuropsychological deficits (NPD) are common in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH). NPD are one of the major limiting factors for patients with an otherwise acceptable prognosis for sustained quality of life. There are only a few studies reporting outcome after aSAH, which used a standardized neuropsychological test battery as a primary or secondary outcome measure. Aim of this study was to determine the current practice of reporting NPD following aSAH in clinical studies. METHODS: A MEDLINE analysis was performed using the search term "subarachnoid haemorrhage outcome". The latest 1,000 articles were screened. We recorded study design, number of patients, and the presence of neuropsychological outcome report. Additionally, the time of testing after aSAH, the neuropsychological tests administered, as well as the percentage of patients with NPD were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 324 publications between 2009 and 2012 were selected for further review. Of those, 21 studies (6.5%) reported neuropsychological outcome, in 2,001 of 346,666 patients (0.6%). The assessment of NPD differed broadly using both subjective and objective cognitive evaluation, and a large variety of tests were used. CONCLUSION: Neuropsychological outcome is underreported, and there is great variety in assessment in currently published clinical articles on aSAH. Prospective randomized trials treating aSAH may benefit from implementing more comprehensive and standardized neuropsychological outcome measures. This approach might identify otherwise unnoticed treatment effects in future interventional studies of aSAH patients.

Outcome of patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome on palliative treatment: insights from the nationwide AMIS Plus Registry 1997-2014.

OBJECTIVE: Compliance with guidelines is increasingly used to benchmark the quality of hospital care, however, very little is known on patients admitted with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and treated palliatively. This study aimed to evaluate the baseline characteristics and outcomes of these patients. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Eighty-two Swiss hospitals enrolled patients from 1997 to 2014. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with ACS enrolled in the AMIS Plus registry (n=45,091) were analysed according to three treatment groups: palliative treatment, defined as use of aspirin and analgesics only and no reperfusion; conservative treatment, defined as any treatment including antithrombotics or anticoagulants, heparins, P2Y12 inhibitors, GPIIb/IIIa but no pharmacological or mechanical reperfusion; and reperfusion treatment (thrombolysis and/or percutaneous coronary intervention during initial hospitalisation). The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality and the secondary measure was 1-year mortality. RESULTS: Of the patients, 1485 (3.3%) were palliatively treated, 11,119 (24.7%) were conservatively treated and 32,487 (72.0%) underwent reperfusion therapy. In 1997, 6% of all patients were treated palliatively and this continuously decreased to 2% in 2013. Baseline characteristics of palliative patients differed in comparison with conservatively treated and reperfusion patients in age, gender and comorbidities (all p<0.001). These patients had more in-hospital complications such as postadmission onset of cardiogenic shock (15.6% vs 5.2%; p<0.001), stroke (1.8% vs 0.8%; p=0.001) and a higher in-hospital mortality (25.8% vs 5.6%; p<0.001).The subgroup of patients followed 1 year after discharge (n=8316) had a higher rate of reinfarction (9.2% vs 3.4%; p=0.003) and mortality (14.0% vs 3.5%; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ACS treated palliatively were older, sicker, with more heart failure at admission and very high in-hospital mortality. While refraining from more active therapy may often constitute the most humane and appropriate approach, we think it is important to also evaluate these patients and include them in registries and outcome evaluations. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01 305 785.

New-onset refractory status epilepticus: Etiology, clinical features, and outcome.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to determine the etiology, clinical features, and predictors of outcome of new-onset refractory status epilepticus. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients with refractory status epilepticus without etiology identified within 48 hours of admission between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2013, in 13 academic medical centers. The primary outcome measure was poor functional outcome at discharge (defined as a score >3 on the modified Rankin Scale). RESULTS: Of 130 cases, 67 (52%) remained cryptogenic. The most common identified etiologies were autoimmune (19%) and paraneoplastic (18%) encephalitis. Full data were available in 125 cases (62 cryptogenic). Poor outcome occurred in 77 of 125 cases (62%), and 28 (22%) died. Predictors of poor outcome included duration of status epilepticus, use of anesthetics, and medical complications. Among the 63 patients with available follow-up data (median 9 months), functional status improved in 36 (57%); 79% had good or fair outcome at last follow-up, but epilepsy developed in 37% with most survivors (92%) remaining on antiseizure medications. Immune therapies were used less frequently in cryptogenic cases, despite a comparable prevalence of inflammatory CSF changes. CONCLUSIONS: Autoimmune encephalitis is the most commonly identified cause of new-onset refractory status epilepticus, but half remain cryptogenic. Outcome at discharge is poor but improves during follow-up. Epilepsy develops in most cases. The role of anesthetics and immune therapies warrants further investigation.