Reduction of routine use of radiography in patients with ankle fractures leads to lower costs and has no impact on clinical outcome: an economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a reduction in the number of routine radiographs in the follow-up of patients with ankle fractures. METHODS: We performed an economic evaluation alongside the multicentre, randomised WARRIOR trial. Participants were randomised to a reduced imaging follow-up protocol (i.e. radiographs at week 6 and 12 follow-up obtained on clinical indication) or usual care (i.e. routine radiography at weeks 6 and 12). The Olerud & Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) was used to assess ankle function and the EQ-5D-3L was used to estimate Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Costs and resource use were assessed using self-reported questionnaires and medical records, and analysed from a societal perspective. Multiple imputation was used for missing data, and data were analysed using seemingly unrelated regression analysis and bootstrapping. RESULTS: In total, 246 patients had data available for analysis (reduced imaging = 118; usual care = 128). Fewer radiographs were obtained in the reduced imaging group (median = 4) compared with the usual-care group (median = 5). Functional outcome was comparable in both groups. The difference in QALYs was - 0.008 (95% CI:-0.06 to 0.04) and the difference in OMAS was 0.73 (95% CI:-5.29 to 6.76). Imaging costs were lower in the reduced imaging group (-€48; 95% CI:- €72 to -€25). All other cost categories did not statistically differ between the groups. The probability of the reduced imaging protocol being cost-effectiveness was 0.45 at a wiliness-to-pay of €20,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing the number of routine follow-up radiographs has a low probability of being cost-effective compared with usual care. Functional outcome, health-related quality of life and societal costs were comparable in both groups, whereas imaging costs were marginally lower in the reduced imaging group. Given this, adherence to a reduced imaging follow-up protocol for those with routine ankle fractures can be followed without sacrificing quality of care, and may result in reduced costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on 26-05-2014 in the Netherlands Trial Registry, with reference number NL4477 ( www.trialregister.nl/trial/4477 ).

Family history is neglected in the work-up of patients with colorectal cancer: a quality assessment using cancer registry data.

In the diagnostic work-up of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC, Lynch syndrome), high-risk patients can be identified using information from the family history on cancer ('Amsterdam criteria' and 'Bethesda guidelines'). To investigate to what extent the medical specialists apply these criteria to patients with colorectal carcinoma and a suspicion of HNPCC, we collected information on diagnostic work-up of 224 patients of seven hospitals in the region of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre West in Leiden, The Netherlands. These patients were diagnosed with colorectal cancer between 1999 and 2001 and satisfied at least one of the Bethesda guidelines. A complete family history was recorded for 38 of the 244 patients (16%). Patients with a complete family history were more likely to be referred to the Clinical Genetic Centre than those with an incomplete or absent family history (53% vs. 13% and 4%, respectively; P < 0.0001), and more likely to be analyzed for microsatellite instability (MSI), which is a characteristic of HNPCC (34% vs. 6% and 1%, respectively; P < 0.0001). We conclude that the family history is neglected in the majority of patients with colorectal cancer and MSI-analysis is only performed in a small proportion of the patients that meet the guidelines for this analysis.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for haematogenous bacterial arthritis in patients with joint disease: a cost effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for haematogenous bacterial arthritis in patients with joint disease. METHODS: In a decision analysis, data from a prospective study on bacterial arthritis in 4907 patients with joint disease were combined with literature data to assess risks and benefits of antibiotic prophylaxis. Effectiveness and cost effectiveness calculations were performed on antibiotic prophylaxis for various patient groups. Grouping was based on (a) type of event leading to transient bacteraemia-that is, infections (dermal, respiratory/urinary tract) and invasive medical procedures-and (b) the patient's susceptibility to bacterial arthritis which was increased in the presence of rheumatoid arthritis, large joint prostheses, comorbidity, and old age. RESULTS: Of the patients with joint disease, 59% had no characteristics that increased susceptibility to bacterial arthritis, and 31% had one. For dermal infections, the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis was maximally 35 quality adjusted life days (QALDs) and the cost effectiveness maximally $52 000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY). For other infections, the effectiveness of prophylaxis was lower and the cost effectiveness higher. Prophylaxis for invasive medical procedures seemed to be acceptable only in patients with high susceptibility: 1 QALD at a cost of $1300/QALY; however, the results were influenced substantially when the level of efficacy of the prophylaxis or cost of prophylactic antibiotics was changed. CONCLUSION: Prophylaxis seems to be indicated only for dermal infections, and for infections of the urinary and respiratory tract in patients with increased susceptibility to bacterial arthritis. Prophylaxis for invasive medical procedures, such as dental treatment, may only be indicated for patients with joint disease who are highly susceptible.

[Antibiotic prophylaxis of hematogenous bacterial arthritis]. / Antibiotische preventie van hematogene bacteriële artritis.

The outcome of bacterial arthritis is generally poor: the mortality is 10-15% and there is loss of joint function in 25-50% of the survivors. Adverse prognostic factors are advanced age, a pre-existent joint disease and an infection of a prosthetic joint. The incidence of bacterial arthritis is low: 2-6 per 100,000 persons per year. Risk factors are advanced age, a joint disease--especially rheumatoid arthritis--diabetes mellitus and presence of a prosthetic joint. Situations that can lead to bacterial arthritis are mainly skin infections of the feet and only rarely invasive medical or dental procedures. Because of the severity of the disease, antibiotic prophylaxis of haematogenous bacterial arthritis in patients with prosthetic joints is advocated in guidelines. However, because of the rarity of the disease it is unclear whether the advantages of prophylaxis outweigh the disadvantages of the large-scale use of antibiotics, such as side effects, costs and increased resistance of bacteria. In a decision analysis of a large group of patients with joint diseases, antibiotic treatment of skin infections appeared to be (cost-)effective in the prevention of haematogenous bacterial arthritis, mainly in high-risk patients. On the other hand, prophylaxis around medical or dental procedures was not (cost-)effective, except possibly in a small group of patients with increased risk.

Inter-observer variability in the angiographic assessment of renal artery stenosis. DRASTIC study group. Dutch Renal Artery Stenosis Intervention Cooperative.

OBJECTIVE: To assess inter-observer agreement in the interpretation of renal angiograms. DESIGN: Comparison of the assessment of renal angiograms by three experienced radiologists, who evaluated the number of renal arteries and the presence, location, aspect and severity of a renal artery stenosis. SETTING: General hospital and university hospital serving urban and rural populations. PATIENTS: Patients with difficult-to-treat hypertension referred for diagnostic work-up; 312 angiograms with the intra-arterial digital subtraction technique were obtained from 289 consecutive patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Inter-observer agreement was tested for the following parameters: number of arteries per kidney, presence of stenosis, location of stenosis (truncal, ostial), aspect of stenosis (concentric, eccentric, post-stenotic dilatation), severity of stenosis (reduction of lumen diameter in categories of 30%, 40%, etc. to 100%), and overall quality of the angiographic images. Kappa (kappa) values and weighted kappa between the three pairs of radiologists were used as estimates of inter-observer agreement RESULTS: Agreement about the number of renal arteries was reasonable (kappa = 0.50-0.72), as was agreement about the presence of stenosis (kappa = 0.68-0.86). Agreement about stenosis location and aspect was poor (kappa = 0.26-0.47 and kappa = 0.15-0.26, respectively). There was general agreement about the severity of stenosis (weighted kappa = 0.65-0.70), but it was not possible to distinguish between 50 and 60% stenosis or between 60 and 70% stenosis (kappa < 0.40). No correlation was found between agreement on severity of stenosis and the quality of the images. CONCLUSIONS: It is not realistic to make statements about what degree of renal artery stenosis is clinically significant, as long as the intra-arterial angiogram with digital subtraction remains the gold standard. It is likewise risky to rely too strongly on stenosis morphology as visualized by renal angiography in choosing between balloon angioplasty and stent deployment.