A new instrument for the assessment of patient-defined benefit in the treatment of allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common disease that affects health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Current and future health policy demands the assessment of patient-relevant treatment benefit for evaluation of treatments. METHODS: We developed, validated and tested a standardized instrument for the assessment of patient-relevant needs and benefits in AR. In an open survey of patients with AR, 100 need and benefit items were generated. The items were condensed to a 25-item list by an expert panel. On this list, patient rates the personal importance of 25 treatment needs on a scale ranging from 'not at all' to 'very' before treatment (Patient Needs Questionnaire, PNQ). At the end of the treatment, patient rates the extent, to which these needs were achieved by treatment from 'did not help at all' to 'helped a lot' (Patient Benefit Questionnaire). The patient benefit index (PBI) is computed to provide a global weighted benefit parameter. This disease-specific instrument was validated in n = 104 patients with AR. RESULTS: The PBI-AR showed good acceptability and feasibility in clinical routine. Reduction in nose and eye symptoms was rated most important. The PBI amounted to 2.2 (PBI ranges from 0 = 'no benefit' to 4 = 'maximum benefit'). Reliability of the PNQ was high (Cronbach's alpha = 0.9).The PBI was significantly correlated with relevant external validation criteria, such as patient satisfaction (R = 0.54) and HRQoL (R = 0.26). CONCLUSION: The PBI-AR is a feasible, reliable and valid instrument for the standardized assessment of patient-relevant benefits in the treatment of AR.

Comparison among three methods for mycobacteria identification.

OBJECTIVE: To compare three methods: Biochemical tests, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragments length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP), for the identification of mycobacteria, and to perform a cost-benefit analysis to define an optimum identification algorithm. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One-hundred-and-seven mycobacteria isolates were identified by the three methods at Instituto de Diagnóstico y Referencia Epidemiológicos, between February of 1999 and January of 2000 and the results were compared with those of a reference laboratory using the Q-Cochran statistical test. RESULTS: PCR-RFLP was the most rapid and specific procedure but also the most expensive; biochemical tests excelled for identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, but were lengthy and expensive for other mycobacteria; HPLC ranked in the middle for price, speed and specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the expected proportion of M. tuberculosis, the following algorithm was proposed: Initially, biochemical tests should be performed; if the results indicate a non-tuberculous mycobacteria, the isolate should be analyzed with HPLC; if results are unclear, the isolate should be analyzed using PCR-RFLP. Isolates showing a previously undescribed PCR-RFLP pattern should be characterized by DNA sequencing.