Discharged but not dissatisfied: outcomes and satisfaction of patients discharged from the Edinburgh Trauma Triage Clinic.

Aims: The Edinburgh Trauma Triage Clinic (TTC) streamlines outpatient care through consultant-led 'virtual' triage of referrals and the direct discharge of minor fractures from the Emergency Department. We compared the patient outcomes for simple fractures of the radial head, little finger metacarpal, and fifth metatarsal before and after the implementation of the TTC. Patients and Methods: A total of 628 patients who had sustained these injuries over a one-year period were identified. There were 337 patients in the pre-TTC group and 289 in the post-TTC group. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (QuickDASH) or Foot and Ankle Disability Index (FADI), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score, satisfaction rates, and return to work/sport were assessed six months post-injury. The development of late complications was excluded by an electronic record evaluation at three years post-injury. A cost analysis was performed. Results: Outcomes were as good or better post-TTC, compared with pre-TTC scores. At three years, the pre-TTC group required a total of 496 fracture clinic appointments compared with 61 in the post-TTC group. Mean cost per patient was nearly fourfold less after the commencement of the TTC. Conclusion: Management of minor fractures through the Edinburgh TTC results in clinical outcomes that are comparable with the previous system of routine face-to-face consultation. Outpatient workload for these injures was reduced by 88%. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:959-65.

Clinical effectiveness, tolerability and cost-effectiveness of newer drugs for epilepsy in adults: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the clinical effectiveness, tolerability and cost-effectiveness of gabapentin (GBP), lamotrigine (LTG), levetiracetam (LEV), oxcarbazepine (OXC), tiagabine (TGB), topiramate (TPM) and vigabatrin (VGB) for epilepsy in adults. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases. Internet resources. Pharmaceutical company submissions. REVIEW METHODS: Selected studies were screened and quality assessed. Separate analyses assessed clinical effectiveness, serious, rare and long-term adverse events and cost-effectiveness. An integrated economic analysis incorporating information on costs and effects of newer and older antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) was performed to give direct comparisons of long-term costs and benefits. RESULTS: A total of 212 studies were included in the review. All included systematic reviews were Cochrane reviews and of good quality. The quality of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was variable. Assessment was hampered by poor reporting of methods of randomisation, allocation concealment and blinding. Few of the non-randomised studies were of good quality. The main weakness of the economic evaluations was inappropriate use of the cost-minimisation design. The included systematic reviews reported that newer AEDs were effective as adjunctive therapy compared to placebo. For newer versus older drugs, data were available for all three monotherapy AEDs, although data for OXC and TPM were limited. There was limited, poor-quality evidence of a significant improvement in cognitive function with LTG and OXC compared with older AEDs. However, there were no consistent statistically significant differences in other clinical outcomes, including proportion of seizure-free patients. No studies assessed effectiveness of AEDs in people with intellectual disabilities or in pregnant women. There was very little evidence to assess the effectiveness of AEDs in the elderly; no significant differences were found between LTG and carbamazepine monotherapy. Sixty-seven RCTs compared adjunctive therapy with placebo, older AEDs or other newer AEDs. For newer AEDs versus placebo, a trend was observed in favour of newer drugs, and there was evidence of statistically significant differences in proportion of responders favouring newer drugs. However, it was not possible to assess long-term effectiveness. Most trials were conducted in patients with partial seizures. For newer AEDs versus older drugs, there was no evidence to assess the effectiveness of LEV, LTG or OXC, and evidence for other newer drugs was limited to single studies. Trials only included patients with partial seizures and follow-up was relatively short. There was no evidence to assess effectiveness of adjunctive LEV, OXC or TPM versus other newer drugs, and there were no time to event or cognitive data. No studies assessed the effectiveness of adjunctive AEDs in the elderly or pregnant women. There was some evidence from one study (GBP versus LTG) that both drugs have some beneficial effect on behaviour in people with learning disabilities. Eighty RCTs reported the incidence of adverse events. There was no consistent or convincing evidence to draw any conclusions concerning relative safety and tolerability of newer AEDs compared with each other, older AEDs or placebo. The integrated economic analysis for monotherapy for newly diagnosed patients with partial seizures showed that older AEDs were more likely to be cost-effective, although there was considerable uncertainty in these results. The integrated analysis suggested that newer AEDs used as adjunctive therapy for refractory patients with partial seizures were more effective and more costly than continuing with existing treatment alone. Combination therapy, involving new AEDs, may be cost-effective at a threshold willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) greater than 20,000 pounds, depending on patients' previous treatment history. There was, again, considerable uncertainty in these results. There were few data available to determine effectiveness of treatments for patients with generalised seizures. LTG and VPA showed similar health benefits when used as monotherapy. VPA was less costly and was likely to be cost-effective. The analysis indicated that TPM might be cost-effective when used as an adjunctive therapy, with an estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 34,500 pounds compared with continuing current treatment alone. CONCLUSIONS: There was little good-quality evidence from clinical trials to support the use of newer monotherapy or adjunctive therapy AEDs over older drugs, or to support the use of one newer AED in preference to another. In general, data relating to clinical effectiveness, safety and tolerability failed to demonstrate consistent and statistically significant differences between the drugs. The exception was comparisons between newer adjunctive AEDs and placebo, where significant differences favoured newer AEDs. However, trials often had relatively short-term treatment durations and often failed to limit recruitment to either partial or generalised onset seizures, thus limiting the applicability of the data. Newer AEDs, used as monotherapy, may be cost-effective for the treatment of patients who have experienced adverse events with older AEDs, who have failed to respond to the older drugs, or where such drugs are contraindicated. The integrated economic analysis also suggested that newer AEDs used as adjunctive therapy may be cost-effective compared with the continuing current treatment alone given a QALY of about 20,000 pounds. There is a need for more direct comparisons of the different AEDs within clinical trials, considering different treatment sequences within both monotherapy and adjunctive therapy. Length of follow-up also needs to be considered. Trials are needed that recruit patients with either partial or generalised seizures; that investigate effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in patients with generalised onset seizures and that investigate effectiveness in specific populations of epilepsy patients, as well as studies evaluating cognitive outcomes to use more stringent testing protocols and to adopt a more consistent approach in assessing outcomes. Further research is also required to assess the quality of life within trials of epilepsy therapy using preference-based measures of outcomes that generate cost-effectiveness data. Future RCTs should use CONSORT guidelines; and observational data to provide information on the use of AEDs in actual practice, including details of treatment sequences and doses.

Psychological correlates of myasthenia gravis: a brief report.

Myasthenia gravis patients and matched normal controls were assessed on a range of psychological indices; myasthenic patients had higher scores on trait anxiety and suppression of anger. There were no other significant differences between the groups on psychological symptom measures (anxiety, depression or anger) or other trait measures (anger, suppression of anxiety and suppression of depression). It is concluded that trait anxiety and suppression of anger may predispose to myasthenia gravis.

Acute and chronic life event stress in coronary atherosclerosis.

The relation between acute and chronic life events stress and atherosclerosis was assessed in 491 patients having coronary angiography for presumed coronary heart disease. There was no evidence that recent acute stressful events or chronic difficulties in adult life were independently related to coronary artery atherosclerosis once potentially confounding variables such as sex were controlled.

Carbon monoxide poisoning in a patient with carbon dioxide retention: a therapeutic challenge.

We present the case of a 70 year-old man with carbon monoxide poisoning following a house fire. A significant smoking history and likely underlying chronic lung pathology complicated treatment, as due to symptomatic retention of carbon dioxide we were unable to use high-flow oxygen to facilitate the elimination of carbon monoxide. We suggest that patients with risk factors for obstructive lung disease be monitored extremely carefully during treatment for carbon monoxide toxicity.

Myasthenia gravis: the problem of a "psychiatric" misdiagnosis.

Patients with myasthenia gravis are commonly misdiagnosed as having a psychiatric disorder; this leads to considerable delay in reaching the correct diagnosis and in instituting appropriate and effective treatment. Patients who are most at risk are those with somatic presentations (limb weakness, fatigue) in contrast to ocular or bulbar presentations. Similarly, those who manifest anger or anxiety traits are more likely to be misdiagnosed.

Anger and other psychological factors in coronary atherosclerosis.

This study of 519 coronary angiography patients failed to replicate our earlier findings in 90 angiography patients (Tennant & Langeluddecke, 1985) which showed that trait tension, trait anxiety and suppression of anger were correlates of atherosclerosis. In the present study a variety of psychological measures, including state and trait anxiety, tension, anger, locus of control and suppression of anger, depression and anxiety, showed no significant association with coronary atherosclerosis as assessed by coronary angiography.