MORe PREcISE: Longitudinal patient reported outcome measures in stroke at 3 and 6 months.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Post-stroke morbidity is common, but little is known about the burden on patients' lives from their own perspective. Understanding morbidity from the point of view of the patient may support targeted intervention in post-stroke recovery. This study used a stroke specific Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) containing Mental health (MH) and Physical Health (PH) domains and 5 stroke specific questions. We aimed to consider trends over a 6-month period and further assess the association between the MH and PH measures and common clinical measures. METHODS: A multicenter prospective cohort study was conducted at 19 hospital sites across England and Wales. Patients were enrolled from August 2018 to September 2019. Clinical measures and PROMs were assessed at three timepoints: acutely following the index stroke, at 3 and 6-months post-stroke. Clinical measures and PROMs were assessed in each of these points. RESULTS: Physical health PROM domains show significant gradual improvement across the study period (χ2 42.6312, p<0.0001), whereas cognitive function domains (χ2 3.7849, p<0.875) did not echo this trend. All clinical measures (GAD-7, PHQ9, MoCA, MRS) were associated with poorer PROM MH outcomes, (aMD -4.4, CI -0.59, -0.29, p≤0.001, aMD -0.45, CI -0.59, -0.32, p=<0.001, aMD 0.75, CI 0.56, 0.95, aMD -1.91, CI -2.41, -1.47, p≤0.001). Clinical measures of disability, as per the MRS, are associated with poor PROM PH scores (aMD -0.57, 95% CI -0.94, -0.20, p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: This research indicates there is unmet cognitive burden in stroke survivors. PROMs may be able to measure unmet more discretely than common clinical tools that are used post-stroke. Further research and guidance on how to integrate PROMs into current clinical frameworks is essential.

MORe PREcISE: a multicentre prospective study of patient reported outcome measures in stroke morbidity: a cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The use of patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs) may offer utility that are important for stroke survivors. This study assessed the PROMIS-10, which contains Mental health (MH) and Physical Health (PH) domains, with an additional five stroke specific questions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the MH and PH measures following a stroke and pre-existing health conditions. METHODS: A multicentre prospective cohort study at 19 hospital sites across England and Wales during 2019 was conducted. The association between each PROMIS-10 domain and demographic and health conditions were calculated using a multilevel multivariable linear and present the adjusted mean difference (aMD). RESULTS: The study enrolled 549 stroke survivors within 14 days of the index event, 232 were women (42.3%) and with a mean age of 72.7 years (SD = 12.9, range 25 to 97). The MH domain was scored as poor in 3.9% of participants, and very good or excellent in almost a half (48.4%). In contrast the PH domain was scored as poor in 39.9%, compared to very good or excellent in 8.5%. The MH domain was associated with pre-existing diabetes (aMD = - 2.01; 95%CI -3.91, - 0.12; p = 0.04), previous stroke (aMD = - 3.62; 95%CI -5.86, - 1.39; p = 0.001), age (aMD = 0.07; 95%CI: 0.01, 0.14; p = 0.037), and female sex (aMD = 1.91; 95%CI 0.28, 3.54; p = 0.022). The PH domain was found to be associated with sex (female) (aMD = 2.09; 95%CI 0.54, 3.65; p = 0.008) and previous stroke (aMD = - 3.05; 95%CI -5.17, - 0.93; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of stroke survivors reported poor PH using a PROM with less reporting poor MH. age, and sex were associated with both MH and PH domains, and additionally pre-exising diabetes and stroke were associated with poorer MH. Clinical management offers an opportunity to investigate and intervene to prevent long term poorer health in stroke survivors.

The Use of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) 6 Months Post-Stroke and Their Association with the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) on Admission to Hospital.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) assess clinical outcomes from the perspective of the patient. The stroke community recommended fifteen questions for use in stroke survivors, based on the established PROMIS10 with five additional stroke-specific questions. This study aimed to determine its association with the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) on admission. PROM responses were taken from an existing randomised control trial and, using secondary analysis, the total score was calculated out of 100. The association between PROMs and NIHSS was estimated. Using a multivariable regression, an adjusted mean difference (aMD) in PROM total score for the baseline clinical characteristics was calculated. 343 participants (16.3%) completed the PROM; mean age 71.7 (30-94) years; 133 women (38.8%). There was a strong association between increasing NIHSS Scores on admission to hospital and worsening PROM scores at 6 months (p = 0.002). There was consistency between the NIHSS and modified Rankin score with the stroke-specific domain and total PROM scores. When adjusted, women had lower (worse) total PROM scores, with aMD = -3.85 (95% CI -6.30--1.41; p = 0.002) and so did haemorrhagic strokes, with a reduction of 3.88 (95% CI -0.61-7.37; p = 0.097). This study contributes to the evaluation process of this stroke-specific PROM and emphasises that stroke severity on admission correlates with poorer patient outcomes 6 months following a stroke, especially in women and those suffering haemorrhagic stroke.

A single patient reported outcome measure for acquired brain injury, multiple sclerosis & Parkinson's disease.

OBJECTIVE: To determine psychometric properties of the PROMIS-10 and Standard Stroke Question Set (by International Consortium for Health Outcome Measures) presented as a new 15-item Patient Related Outcome (PRO), for patients with: acquired Brain Injury (ABI), Multiple sclerosis (MS) and Parkinson's disease (PD). METHODS: In an eight centre, UK wide, cross-sectional study we approached patients during their routine follow-up to complete: a disease-specific instrument (European Brain Injury Questionnaire, Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale, and Parkinson's disease questionnaire); General Health questionnaire with a Quality of life measure (EQ-5D); and PRO. We validated the PRO using factor analysis to define the latent construct domains, then calculated the internal consistency (Cronbach's-α), and construct validity (correlation). RESULTS: There were 340 patients with ABI (N = 91, median age = 55.1, 41% female), MS (N = 99, age = 58.9, 69%) and PD (N = 150, age = 74.5, 40%). Factor analysis suggested the PRO offered three domains of: physical health; functionality-capacity and mental health. All factors correlated strongly with the three disease-specific instruments, and the overall PRO had a large correlation with the EQ-5D (correlation>0.8) offering good construct validity and excellent internal consistency (∝>0.89). INTERPRETATION: The PRO offered promising psychometric properties and could be used in place of disease specific questionnaires for patients with ABI, MS, and PD. The PRO has three construct domains, describing patients': mental health; physical health; and functional-capacity, and may be used in routine clinical practice. The PRO offered both relevance to each of the three separate neurological conditions and generalisability across all the conditions, increasing its utility.

Pharmacological Comparison of Mitragynine and 7-Hydroxymitragynine: In Vitro Affinity and Efficacy for µ-Opioid Receptor and Opioid-Like Behavioral Effects in Rats.

Relationships between µ-opioid receptor (MOR) efficacy and effects of mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine are not fully established. We assessed in vitro binding affinity and efficacy and discriminative stimulus effects together with antinociception in rats. The binding affinities of mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine at MOR (Ki values 77.9 and 709 nM, respectively) were higher than their binding affinities at κ-opioid receptor (KOR) or δ-opioid receptor (DOR). [35S]guanosine 5'-O-[γ-thio]triphosphate stimulation at MOR demonstrated that mitragynine was an antagonist, whereas 7-hydroxymitragynine was a partial agonist (Emax = 41.3%). In separate groups of rats discriminating either morphine (3.2 mg/kg) or mitragynine (32 mg/kg), mitragynine produced a maximum of 72.3% morphine-lever responding, and morphine produced a maximum of 65.4% mitragynine-lever responding. Other MOR agonists produced high percentages of drug-lever responding in the morphine and mitragynine discrimination assays: 7-hydroxymitragynine (99.7% and 98.1%, respectively), fentanyl (99.7% and 80.1%, respectively), buprenorphine (99.8% and 79.4%, respectively), and nalbuphine (99.4% and 98.3%, respectively). In the morphine and mitragynine discrimination assays, the KOR agonist U69,593 produced maximums of 72.3% and 22.3%, respectively, and the DOR agonist SNC 80 produced maximums of 34.3% and 23.0%, respectively. 7-Hydroxymitragynine produced antinociception; mitragynine did not. Naltrexone antagonized all of the effects of morphine and 7-hydroxymitragynine; naltrexone antagonized the discriminative stimulus effects of mitragynine but not its rate-decreasing effects. Mitragynine increased the potency of the morphine discrimination yet decreased morphine antinociception. Here we illustrate striking differences in MOR efficacy, with mitragynine having less than 7-hydroxymitragynine. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: At human µ-opioid receptor (MOR) in vitro, mitragynine has low affinity and is an antagonist, whereas 7-hydroxymitragynine has 9-fold higher affinity than mitragynine and is an MOR partial agonist. In rats, intraperitoneal mitragynine exhibits a complex pharmacology including MOR agonism; 7-hydroxymitragynine has higher MOR potency and efficacy than mitragynine. These results are consistent with 7-hydroxymitragynine being a highly selective MOR agonist and with mitragynine having a complex pharmacology that combines low efficacy MOR agonism with activity at nonopioid receptors.

Morbidity Prevalence Estimate at 6 Months Following a Stroke: Protocol for a Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of the prevalence of morbidity secondary to stroke is important for health care professionals, health care commissioners, third sector organizations, and stroke survivors to understand the likely progress of poststroke sequelae and to aid in commissioning decisions, planning care, and adjusting to life after stroke. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of the Morbidity PRevalence Estimate In StrokE (MORe PREcISE) study is to determine the prevalence of morbidity secondary to a stroke, predictors of morbidity, and trends in quality of life and functional status using patient-reported outcomes, cognitive and functional assessments. METHODS: A total of 500 participants will be recruited across Wales and England within 14 days following an admission to a stroke unit for either an ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke as part of a multicenter cohort study. Participants are assessed at baseline ≤14 days poststroke and subsequently at 90 (± 14) days and 180 (± 14) days poststroke. At each time point, data will be collected relating to the following domains: participant demographics, routine clinical, patient reported, cognitive status, emotional well-being, and functional ability. RESULTS: Recruitment commenced in October 2018 with 20 sites opened as of September 2019 and was closed on October 31, 2019. CONCLUSIONS: The primary outcome is the prevalence of morbidity at 6 months secondary to a stroke. Further analysis will consider temporal changes in the health-related domains to describe trends among baseline, 3-, and 6-month time points. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03605381; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03605381. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/15851.

A multi-centre, UK-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors.

BACKGROUND: Recovery following a stroke is a long and ongoing process. Post-stroke follow-up after leaving the hospital is recommended. Methods for follow-up patients include face-to-face, via the telephone, post or online (internet). However, there is a debate which method is preferred by patients. This study aimed to determine whether telephone interview, online questionnaire and postal questionnaire were as acceptable as face-to-face follow-up. METHODS: In a blinded, UK-wide, multi-centre, Zelen's designed, 4-arm (postal, online, telephone, compared to face-to-face), pragmatic non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of the mode of administration, stroke survivors were randomised to postal, online, telephone and face-to-face assessment, in an equal ratio (1:1:1:1). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants that responded to the three allocation groups, compared to the face-to-face group. Subgroup analyses for age, aphasia and type and severity of stroke were carried out. A non-inferiority margin of 0.025 was used, and Holm-Bonferroni multiplicity adjustment was made. RESULTS: Of the 2074 eligible patients randomised, 55% were male (1142/2074), with an average age of 73.0 years old (SD = 13.2). Of those randomised, 22% (116/525), 9% (47/515) and 20% (101/513) responded in postal, online and telephone, respectively, compared to 17% (89/521) in the face-to-face group. The reduction in the online response rate compared to face-to-face was found to be both inferior and not non-inferior and estimated as an 8% reduction (95% CI 3.9 to 12.0%; p < 0.001). The association with lower online completion was present regardless of age, stroke type (haemorrhage or infarct) and stroke severity. In haemorrhagic stroke, the reduction in response online, compared to face-to-face, was 21% (95% CI 10 to 32%; p value = 0.002). A secondary analysis found non-aphasic stroke survivors preferred postal completion adjusted odds ratio of 1.43 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.95; p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: The study found that fewer stroke survivors completed follow-up assessment using an online method, compared to face-to-face. This finding was present in all age groups. Caution should be employed when considering online follow-up methods in stroke survivors, particularly in those who have experienced a cerebrovascular haemorrhage. TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03177161 . Registered on 6 June 2017.

The effects of mitragynine and morphine on schedule-controlled responding and antinociception in rats.

RATIONALE: Mitragyna speciosa (kratom) may hold promise as both an analgesic and treatment for opioid use disorder. Mitragynine, its primary alkaloid constituent, is an opioid receptor ligand. However, the extent to which the in vivo effects of mitragynine are mediated by opioid receptors, or whether mitragynine interacts with other opioid agonists, is not fully established. OBJECTIVES: The effects of mitragynine and the prototypical opioid agonist morphine were compared for their capacity to decrease operant responding for food delivery, and to increase response latency to a thermal stimulus. METHODS: Male and female Sprague-Dawley rats responded under a multiple cycle fixed ratio 10 schedule of food delivery and were tested on a hot plate (52 °C) immediately after each cycle. Morphine and mitragynine were administered alone, in combination with each other, and in combination with the opioid antagonist naltrexone. RESULTS: Morphine and mitragynine dose-dependently decreased schedule-controlled responding; the ED50 values were 7.3 and 31.5 mg/kg, respectively. Both drugs increased thermal antinociception; the ED50 value for morphine was 18.3. Further, doses of naltrexone that antagonized morphine did not antagonize mitragynine. Mitragynine (17.8 mg/kg) did not alter the rate-decreasing or antinociceptive effects of morphine. CONCLUSIONS: The antinociceptive effects of mitragynine and morphine occur at doses larger than those that disrupt learned behavior. Opioid receptors do not appear to mediate the disruptive effects of mitragynine on learned behavior. Mitragynine had lesser antinociceptive effects than morphine, and these did not appear to be mediated by opioid receptors. The pharmacology of mitragynine includes a substantial non-opioid mechanism.

Acceptability of the method of administration of a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) with stroke survivors, a randomised controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: UK-wide national clinical guidelines promote routine 6-month post-stroke follow-up assessment. However, as part of this 6-month assessment little information is gathered from the patient's perspective. The means of collecting this patient-centred information might be served best by a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) at the 6-month assessment time point. Currently, four different methods of 6-month follow-up assessment occur; the most common being face-to-face interview followed by telephone interview, postal questionnaire and online questionnaire. Therefore, this study will investigate if the acceptability of telephone, online or postal administration of a PROM at the 6-month post-stoke time point is not inferior to face-to-face administration. METHODS/DESIGN: A UK multicentre, blinded (analyst and researcher), pragmatic, non-inferiority study, with 80% power using a 2.5% non-inferiority margin was designed to compare the acceptability of three modes of administration (telephone interview, postal questionnaire and online questionnaire) compared with face-to-face interview administration of a PROM. We plan to approach and randomise a minimum of 808 potentially eligible participants, 202 participants per group. DISCUSSION: The aim of this ongoing research is to understand if there is a difference between face-to-face administration and the other three methods of administering a PROM as a patient-centred supplement to the 6-month review for stroke survivors. In utilising a pragmatic design, it is believed that this study will offer UK wide generalisable results, of the acceptability of the methods under investigation, to inform clinicians and commissioners of stroke services. TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03177161 . Registered on 6 June 2017.