Health-related quality of life after 12 months post discharge in patients hospitalised with COVID-19-related severe acute respiratory infection (SARI): a prospective analysis of SF-36 data and correlation with retrospective admission data on age, disease severity, and frailty.

Long-term outcome and 'health-related quality of life' (HRQoL) following hospitalisation for COVID-19-related severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) is limited. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of HRQoL in patients hospitalised with COVID-19-related SARI at 1 year post discharge, focusing on the potential impact of age, frailty, and disease severity. METHOD: Routinely collected outcome data on 1207 patients admitted with confirmed COVID-19 related SARI across all three secondary care sites in our NHS trust over 3 months were assessed in this retrospective cohort study. Of those surviving 1 year, we prospectively collected 36-item short form (SF-36) HRQoL questionnaires, comparing three age groups (<49, 49-69, and the over 69-year-olds), the relative impact of frailty (using the Clinical Frailty Score; CFS), and disease severity (using National Early Warning Score; NEWS) on HRQoL domains. RESULTS: Overall mortality was 46.5% in admitted patients. In our SF-36 cohort (n=169), there was a significant reduction in all HRQoL domains versus normative data; the most significant reductions were in the physical component (p<0.001) across all ages and the emotional component (p<0.01) in the 49-69 year age group, with age having no additional impact on HRQoL. However, there was a significant correlation between physical well-being versus CFS (the correlation coefficient=-0.37, p<0.05), though not NEWS, with no gender difference observed. CONCLUSION: There was a significant reduction in all SF-36 domains at 1 year. Poor CFS at admission was associated with a significant and prolonged impact on physical parameters at 1 year. Age had little impact on the severity of HRQoL, except in the domains of physical functioning and the overall physical component.

Gathering Global Perspectives to Establish the Research Priorities and Minimum Data Sets for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Sampling Strategy of the First Round Consensus Surveys of AO Spine RECODE-DCM.

STUDY DESIGN: Survey. INTRODUCTION: AO Spine Research Objectives and Common Data Elements for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (AO Spine RECODE-DCM) is an international initiative that aims to accelerate knowledge discovery and improve outcomes by developing a consensus framework for research. This includes defining the top research priorities, an index term and a minimum data set (core outcome set and core data elements set - core outcome set (COS)/core data elements (CDE)). OBJECTIVE: To describe how perspectives were gathered and report the detailed sampling characteristics. METHODS: A two-stage, electronic survey was used to gather and seek initial consensus. Perspectives were sought from spinal surgeons, other healthcare professionals and people with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). Participants were allocated to one of two parallel streams: (1) priority setting or (2) minimum dataset. An email campaign was developed to advertise the survey to relevant global stakeholder individuals and organisations. People with DCM were recruited using the international DCM charity Myelopathy.org and its social media channels. A network of global partners was recruited to act as project ambassadors. Data from Google Analytics, MailChimp and Calibrum helped optimise survey dissemination. RESULTS: Survey engagement was high amongst the three stakeholder groups: 208 people with DCM, 389 spinal surgeons and 157 other healthcare professionals. Individuals from 76 different countries participated; the United States, United Kingdom and Canada were the most common countries of participants. CONCLUSION: AO Spine RECODE-DCM recruited a diverse and sufficient number of participants for an international PSP and COS/CDE process. Whilst PSP and COS/CDE have been undertaken in other fields, to our knowledge, this is the first time they have been combined in one process.

Neuroimaging classification of progression patterns in glioblastoma: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Our primary objective was to report the current neuroimaging classification systems of spatial patterns of progression in glioblastoma. In addition, we aimed to report the terminology used to describe 'progression' and to assess the compliance with the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) Criteria. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to identify all neuroimaging studies of glioblastoma that have employed a categorical classification system of spatial progression patterns. Our review was registered with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) registry. RESULTS: From the included 157 results, we identified 129 studies that used labels of spatial progression patterns that were not based on radiation volumes (Group 1) and 50 studies that used labels that were based on radiation volumes (Group 2). In Group 1, we found 113 individual labels and the most frequent were: local/localised (58%), distant/distal (51%), diffuse (20%), multifocal (15%) and subependymal/subventricular zone (15%). We identified 13 different labels used to refer to 'progression', of which the most frequent were 'recurrence' (99%) and 'progression' (92%). We identified that 37% (n = 33/90) of the studies published following the release of the RANO classification were adherent compliant with the RANO criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Our review reports significant heterogeneity in the published systems used to classify glioblastoma spatial progression patterns. Standardization of terminology and classification systems used in studying progression would increase the efficiency of our research in our attempts to more successfully treat glioblastoma.