Effect of Hemodiafiltration or Hemodialysis on Mortality in Kidney Failure.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have suggested that patients with kidney failure may benefit from high-dose hemodiafiltration as compared with standard hemodialysis. However, given the limitations of the various published studies, additional data are needed. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, multinational, randomized, controlled trial involving patients with kidney failure who had received high-flux hemodialysis for at least 3 months. All the patients were deemed to be candidates for a convection volume of at least 23 liters per session (as required for high-dose hemodiafiltration) and were able to complete patient-reported outcome assessments. The patients were assigned to receive high-dose hemodiafiltration or continuation of conventional high-flux hemodialysis. The primary outcome was death from any cause. Key secondary outcomes were cause-specific death, a composite of fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular events, kidney transplantation, and recurrent all-cause or infection-related hospitalizations. RESULTS: A total of 1360 patients underwent randomization: 683 to receive high-dose hemodiafiltration and 677 to receive high-flux hemodialysis. The median follow-up was 30 months (interquartile range, 27 to 38). The mean convection volume during the trial in the hemodiafiltration group was 25.3 liters per session. Death from any cause occurred in 118 patients (17.3%) in the hemodiafiltration group and in 148 patients (21.9%) in the hemodialysis group (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.65 to 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with kidney failure resulting in kidney-replacement therapy, the use of high-dose hemodiafiltration resulted in a lower risk of death from any cause than conventional high-flux hemodialysis. (Funded by the European Commission Research and Innovation; CONVINCE Dutch Trial Register number, NTR7138.).

How Are Age, Gender, and Country Differences Associated With PROMIS Physical Function, Upper Extremity, and Pain Interference Scores?

BACKGROUND: The interpretation of patient-reported outcomes requires appropriate comparison data. Currently, no patient-specific reference data exist for the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF), Upper Extremity (UE), and Pain Interference (PI) scales for individuals 50 years and older. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Can all PROMIS PF, UE, and PI items be used for valid cross-country comparisons in these domains among the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany? (2) How are age, gender, and country related to PROMIS PF, PROMIS UE, and PROMIS PI scores? (3) What is the relationship of age, gender, and country across individuals with PROMIS PF, PROMIS UE, and PROMIS PI scores ranging from very low to very high? METHODS: We conducted telephone interviews to collect custom PROMIS PF (22 items), UE (eight items), and PI (eight items) short forms, as well as sociodemographic data (age, gender, work status, and education level), with participants randomly selected from the general population older than 50 years in the United States (n = 900), United Kingdom (n = 905), and Germany (n = 921). We focused on these individuals because of their higher prevalence of surgeries and lower physical functioning. Although response rates varied across countries (14% for the United Kingdom, 22% for Germany, and 12% for the United States), we used existing normative data to ensure demographic alignment with the overall populations of these countries. This helped mitigate potential nonresponder bias and enhance the representativeness and validity of our findings. We investigated differential item functioning to determine whether all items can be used for valid crosscultural comparisons. To answer our second research question, we compared age groups, gender, and countries using median regressions. Using imputation of plausible values and quantile regression, we modeled age-, gender-, and country-specific distributions of PROMIS scores to obtain patient-specific reference values and answer our third research question. RESULTS: All items from the PROMIS PF, UE, and PI measures were valid for across-country comparisons. We found clinically meaningful associations of age, gender, and country with PROMIS PF, UE, and PI scores. With age, PROMIS PF scores decreased (age ß Median = -0.35 [95% CI -0.40 to -0.31]), and PROMIS UE scores followed a similar trend (age ß Median = -0.38 [95% CI -0.45 to -0.32]). This means that a 10-year increase in age corresponded to a decline in approximately 3.5 points for the PROMIS PF score-a value that is approximately the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Concurrently, we observed a modest increase in PROMIS PI scores with age, reaching half the MCID after 20 years. Women in all countries scored higher than men on the PROMIS PI and 1 MCID lower on the PROMIS PF and UE. Additionally, there were higher T-scores for the United States than for the United Kingdom across all domains. The difference in scores ranged from 1.21 points for the PROMIS PF to a more pronounced 3.83 points for the PROMIS UE. Participants from the United States exhibited up to half an MCID lower T-scores than their German counterparts for the PROMIS PF and PROMIS PI. In individuals with high levels of physical function, with each 10-year increase in age, there could be a decrease of up to 4 points in PROMIS PF scores. Across all levels of upper extremity function, women reported lower PROMIS UE scores than men by an average of 5 points. CONCLUSION: Our study provides age-, gender-, and country-specific reference values for PROMIS PF, UE, and PI scores, which can be used by clinicians, researchers, and healthcare policymakers to better interpret patient-reported outcomes and provide more personalized care. These findings are particularly relevant for those collecting patient-reported outcomes in their clinical routine and researchers conducting multinational studies. We provide an internet application ( www.common-metrics.org/PROMIS_PF_and_PI_Reference_scores.php ) for user-friendly accessibility in order to perform age, gender, and country conversions of PROMIS scores. Population reference values can also serve as comparators to data collected with other PROMIS short forms or computerized adaptive tests. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, diagnostic study.

[Indication and Prevalence of Inpatient Psychosomatic-Psychotherapeutic Rehabilitation in Patients in Outpatient Psychotherapy Data from a Study on the Epidemiology of Care]. / Stationäre psychosomatisch-psychotherapeutische Rehabilitation und ambulante Richtlinienpsychotherapie ­ Ergebnisse einer versorgungsepidemiologischen Untersuchung.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient psychotherapy is qualitatively and quantitatively an important treatment option for patients with psychological disorders. Additionally, there is the option of inpatient care, including psychosomatic rehabilitation units. There is a lack of data on the cooperation between the ambulatory and the inpatient sector, and on which patients in outpatient psychotherapy have already been in psychosoamtic rehabilitation or should be admitted. METHOD: 131 psychotherapists were interview with regard to 322 cases they had recently seen with focus on the ongoing treatment, previous rehabilitation-treatments and current indications for rehabilitation programs. RESULTS: Almost all patients were suffering from year long disorders. More than every second patient had problems at work. Together, these are core criteria for psychosomatic rehabilitation. 28% had already been in inpatient rehabilitation and another 28% were seen in need of inpatient rehabilitation. Comparison of patients who had been, were in need, or did not need such treatment showed that rehabilitation patients were older, had a lower education, were more severe ill, showed a more problematic course of treatment, had more problems with participation and needed more socio-medical support. DISCUSSION: Results suggest that psychotherapists treat many patients, who fullfilled admission criteria for inpatient rehabilitation. They are important cooperation partners of rehabilitation units. Pension and health care insurance should support cooperation. Because of the great number of patients there is also the need to sharpen the criteria for inpatient treatment.

Patient-reported outcomes for people with diabetes: what and how to measure? A narrative review.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are valuable for shared decision making and research. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires used to measure PROs, such as health-related quality of life (HRQL). Although core outcome sets for trials and clinical practice have been developed separately, they, as well as other initiatives, recommend different PROs and PROMs. In research and clinical practice, different PROMs are used (some generic, some disease-specific), which measure many different things. This is a threat to the validity of research and clinical findings in the field of diabetes. In this narrative review, we aim to provide recommendations for the selection of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs for people with diabetes for use in clinical practice and research. Based on a general conceptual framework of PROs, we suggest that relevant PROs to measure in people with diabetes are: disease-specific symptoms (e.g. worries about hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress), general symptoms (e.g. fatigue and depression), functional status, general health perceptions and overall quality of life. Generic PROMs such as the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0), or Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures could be considered to measure commonly relevant PROs, supplemented with disease-specific PROMs where needed. However, none of the existing diabetes-specific PROM scales has been sufficiently validated, although the Diabetes Symptom Self-Care Inventory (DSSCI) for measuring diabetes-specific symptoms and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) and Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) for measuring distress showed sufficient content validity. Standardisation and use of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs can help inform people with diabetes about the expected course of disease and treatment, for shared decision making, to monitor outcomes and to improve healthcare. We recommend further validation studies of diabetes-specific PROMs that have sufficient content validity for measuring disease-specific symptoms and consider generic item banks developed based on item response theory for measuring commonly relevant PROs.

What Kind of Patients Receive Inpatient and Day-Hospital Treatment in Departments of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy in Germany?

INTRODUCTION: Germany is one of the few countries with a medical specialty of psychosomatic medicine and psychotherapy and many treatment resources of this kind. OBJECTIVE: This observational study describes the psychosomatic treatment programs as well as a large sample of day-hospital and inpatients in great detail using structured diagnostic interviews. METHODS: Mental disorders were diagnosed according to ICD-10 and DSM-IV by means of Mini-DIPS and SCID-II. In addition to the case records, a modified version of the CSSRI was employed to collect demographic data and service use. The PHQ-D was used to assess depression, anxiety, and somatization. RESULTS: 2,094 patients from 19 departments participated in the study after giving informed consent. The sample consisted of a high proportion of "complex patients" with high comorbidity of mental and somatic diseases, severe psychopathology, and considerable social and occupational dysfunction including more than 50 days of sick leave per year in half of the sample. The most frequent diagnoses were depression, somatoform and anxiety disorders, eating disorders, personality disorders, and somato-psychic conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient and day-hospital treatment in German university departments of psychosomatic medicine and psychotherapy is an intensive multimodal treatment for complex patients with high comorbidity and social as well as occupational dysfunction.

The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Utility-Core 10 Dimensions: Development and Investigation of General Population Utility Norms for Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Utility-Core 10 Dimensions (EORTC QLU-C10D) is a cancer-specific preference-based measure, providing health utilities for use in economic evaluations derived from the widely used health-related quality of life measure, EORTC QLQ-C30. Several EORTC QLU-C10D country-specific value sets are available. This article aimed to provide EORTC QLU-C10D general population utility norms for Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and the United Kingdom, to aid interpretability of obtained utilities in these countries. METHODS: Data were collected in aforementioned countries via a quota-sampled, cross-sectional online survey (n = 100/age-sex group; N = approximately 1000/country). Participants were asked to complete the EORTC QLQ-C30 and provide sociodemographic data. Country-specific utility norms were calculated using the respective country tariff on the country's EORTC QLQ-C30 data after weighting to achieve population representativeness for age and sex. Norm values are provided as means (SDs) by country, age, and sex groups. Tukey's multiple comparison test investigated mean differences among countries. The impact of country, age, and sex on utility values was investigated with a multiple linear regression model. RESULTS: Country-specific mean utilities range from 0.724 (United Kingdom) to 0.843 (Italy). Country-, sex-, and age-specific mean utilities range from 0.664 for 30- to 39-year-old male Canadians to 0.899 for > 70-year-old male Italians. Utilities were lower in females in 4 of 6 countries, and the impact of age differed among countries. Independent of the impact of age and sex, between-country differences were found (P ≤ .05). CONCLUSION: Results showed a varying impact of age and sex on EORTC QLU-C10D utilities and significant between-country differences. Using national utility norms and utility decrements is recommended.

Scale agreement, ceiling and floor effects, construct validity, and relative efficiency of the PROPr and EQ-5D-3L in low back pain patients.

BACKGROUND: The PROMIS Preference score (PROPr) is a new health state utility (HSU) score that aims to comprehensively incorporate the biopsychosocial model of health and apply favorable psychometric properties from the descriptive PROMIS system to HSU measurements. However, minimal evidence concerning comparisons to the EQ-5D-3L and the PROPr's capability to differentiate clinical severity are available. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the PROPr to the EQ-5D-3L in terms of scale agreement, ceiling/floor effects, distribution, construct validity, discriminatory power, and relative efficiency (RE) in terms of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for patients with low back pain (LBP). METHODS: We used intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots to compare the PROPr and EQ-5D-3L with regared to scale agreement in a cross-sectional routine sample of LBP patients. For distribution, we used the Pearson's coefficient for skewness and for ceiling/floor effects, a 15%-top/bottom threshold. For convergent validity, we used Pearson's correlation coefficients. For known-groups validity, we applied a linear regression with interaction terms (predictors sex, age, and ODI level) and an analysis of variance (ANOVA). For discriminatory power, we calculated the effect size (ES) using Cohen's d and the ratio of the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curves (AUROC-ratio = AUROCPROPr/AUROCEQ-5D-3L). RE was measured using the ratio of F-values (RE = FPROPr/FEQ-5D-3L). RESULTS: Of 218 LBP patients, 50.0% were female and the mean age was 61.8 years. The mean PROPr (0.20, 95%CI: 0.18; 0.22) and EQ-5D-3L scores (0.55, 95%CI: 0.51; 0.58) showed low agreement (d = 0.35, p < 0.001; ICC 0.27, 95%CI: -0.09; 0.59). The PROPr's distribution was positively skewed, whereas the EQ-5D-3L's was negative. Neither tool showed ceiling/floor effects, but all EQ-5D-3L dimensions did. Pearson correlation was r = 0.66 (95%CI: 0.58; 0.73). Differences were invariant to sex and age but not to ODI severity: ESEQ-5D-3L > ESPROPr and RE < 1 in higher ODI severity; ESEQ-5D-3L < ESPROPr and RE > 1 in lower ODI severity. AUROC-ratios did not show significant differences in terms of ODI severity. CONCLUSIONS: All PROPr and EQ-5D-3L biopsychosocial dimensions of health showed impairment in LPB patients. The capability of EQ-5D-3L and PROPr to differentiate ODI levels depends on ODI severity. Joint application of both tools may provide additional information.

Are OMERACT recommendations followed in clinical trials on fibromyalgia? A systematic review of patient-reported outcomes and their measures.

PURPOSE: Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and its measures (PROMs) are key to outcome assessment in Fibromyalgia (FM) trials. The aim of this review was to investigate which domains and instruments were assessed in recent FM trials and to compare them to recommendations by the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) initiative. In addition, we investigated the overlap with a generic health assessment approach, i.e. eight domains suggested by the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®). METHODS: In compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic literature search in scientific databases including PubMed, PsycInfo, and Embase was conducted to identify studies that assessed at least two dimensions of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) from 2015 to June 2022. Non-randomized and randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. We extracted PROs and PROMs used in each study. RESULTS: From 1845 identified records, 107 records out of 105 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies investigated 50 PROs using 126 different PROMs. Most frequently assessed domains were pain, depression, fatigue, and anxiety (> 95% of the studies). The disease-specific FIQ was the most frequently applied PROM (82%). Overall, only 9% of the studies covered all domains deemed mandatory by OMERACT. Very few studies covered all eight generic health domains suggested by PROMIS. CONCLUSION: The majority of trials covered most OMERACT domains or generic PROMIS health domains. There was, however, great variability in the instruments used to assess the domains, which points at a limited degree of standardization in the field.

PROMIS-29 and EORTC QLQ-C30: an empirical investigation towards a common conception of health.

PURPOSE: The assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measured via patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is a key component in clinical trials and increasingly used in clinical routine worldwide. Two PRO measures (PROMs) that share the same definition of health and report outcomes on a comparable T-metric anchored to general population samples are the PROMIS-29 and the EORTC QLQ-C30. In this study, we investigate the empirical agreement of these underlying concepts. METHODS: We collected PROMIS-29 and EORTC QLQ-C30 data from 1,478 female patients at a breast cancer outpatient centre. We calculated descriptive statistics and correlations between the subscales of both instruments. We performed exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in randomly split subsamples in order to assess the underlying psychometric structure of both instruments. RESULTS: The cohort (mean age = 47.4, ± 14.49) reported comparable mean HRQOL scores between the corresponding subscales of both instruments similar to general population reference values. Correlation between the corresponding subscales of both instruments ranged between 0.59 (Social Role) and 0.78 (Physical Functioning). Both an exploratory and a theoretically driven confirmatory factor analysis provided further support for conceptual agreement of the scales. CONCLUSION: EORTC QLQ-C30 and PROMIS-29 showed similar scores and satisfactory agreement in conceptional and statistical analysis. This suggests that the underlying conceptualization of health is reasonably close. Hence, the development of score transformation algorithms or calibration of both instruments on common scales could prospectively increase the comparability of clinical and research PRO data collected with either instrument.

Measuring PROMIS pain interference in German patients with chronic conditions: calibration, validation, and cross-cultural use of item parameters.

PURPOSE: To calibrate the item parameters of the German PROMIS® Pain interference (PROMIS PI) items using an item-response theory (IRT) model and investigate psychometric properties of the item bank. METHODS: Forty items of the PROMIS PI item bank were collected in a convenience sample of 660 patients, which were recruited during inpatient rheumatological treatment or outpatient psychosomatic medicine visits in Germany. Unidimensionality, monotonicity, and local independence were tested as required for IRT analyses. Unidimensionality was examined using confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Unidimensional and bifactor graded-response IRT models were fitted to the data. Bifactor indices were used to investigate whether multidimensionality would lead to biased scores. To evaluate convergent and discriminant validity, the item bank was correlated with legacy pain instruments. Potential differential item functioning (DIF) was examined for gender, age, and subsample. To investigate whether U.S. item parameters may be used to derive T-scores in German patients, T-scores based on previously published U.S. and newly estimated German item parameters were compared with each other after adjusting for sample specific differences. RESULTS: All items were sufficiently unidimensional, locally independent, and monotonic. Whereas the fit of the unidimensional IRT model was not acceptable, a bifactor IRT model demonstrated acceptable fit. Explained common variance and Omega hierarchical suggested that using the unidimensional model would not lead to biased scores. One item demonstrated DIF between subsamples. High correlations with legacy pain instruments supported construct validity of the item bank. T-scores based on U.S. and German item parameters were similar suggesting that U.S. parameters could be used in German samples. CONCLUSION: The German PROMIS PI item bank proved to be a clinically valid and precise instrument for assessing pain interference in patients with chronic conditions.

[Chronic tinnitus: An interplay between somatic and psychological factors]. / Chronischer Tinnitus im Wechselspiel somatischer und psychischer Faktoren.

Chronic tinnitus is a common, sometimes highly distressing phenomenon that can be triggered and maintained by an interplay of physical and psychological factors. Partnering with clinical psychology and psychosomatic medicine, modern otolaryngology integrates both medical (e.g., hearing loss) and psychological influences (e.g., interactions between biographical experiences, personality traits, subjective evaluation of intrapsychic and interpersonal stimuli, emotional states, and intrapsychic or interpersonal emotion regulation strategies). Both groups of variables can influence the intensity and course of chronic tinnitus symptomatology both directly and indirectly, whereby the quality and relative degrees of psychological and physical components in a person's self-experience can fluctuate. With this in mind, the present article distinguishes between chronic tinnitus symptomatology with or without hearing loss-and strongly advocates for an integrated understanding of the symptomatology within a holistic psychological frame of reference. After a brief introduction to the principles of psychosomatic medicine and psychotherapy, the article discusses psychological case conceptualization using a vulnerability-stress-coping (VSC) model as an example, outlines clinical aspects and diagnostics of chronic tinnitus symptomatology, and concludes with a conceptualization of chronic tinnitus-related distress as a function of person-centered VSC interactions.

[Analysis of items on the short forms of the tinnitus questionnaire: Mini-TQ-12 and Mini-TQ-15]. / Itemanalyse der Kurzformen des Tinnitusfragebogens: Mini-TF-12 und Mini-TF-15.

BACKGROUND: A brief but reliable measurement of tinnitus-related distress is crucial for understanding and treatment options for this often very limiting symptom. Several self-report questionnaires are used in German-speaking countries and several short versions exist for the German translation of the Tinnitus Questionnaire (TQ). OBJECTIVE: In the present work, the frequently used Mini-TQ-12 questionnaire and the newly developed Mini-TQ-15 questionnaire will be investigated with regard to reliability, item difficulty, sensitivity (discriminatory power), and predictive power of the items in order to facilitate a decision for one or the other questionnaire in different examination contexts. METHODS: Data from 1409 patients with chronic tinnitus who completed the German 52-item version of the TQ and additional psychological tests (ADS­L, BSF, PHQ, ACSA and SWOP) at the Tinnitus Centre of the Charité Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Germany, were retrospectively analyzed. We performed external validation of items from different versions of the TQ (original version, Mini-TQ-12, and Mini-TQ-15). RESULTS: The items of the Mini-TQ-12 and the Mini-TQ-15 predicted specifically the total score. Both short questionnaires are of comparable quality in terms of reliability and item construction (difficulty, discriminatory power). CONCLUSION: Both questionnaires have a very good item quality and are clinically more efficient to use than the long-form TQ. If a similarity of the factor structure to the original questionnaire is required for research questions, the use of the Mini-TQ-15 is recommended.

Tinnitus and Influencing Comorbidities. / Tinnitus und beeinflussende Komorbiditäten.

Numerous studies show that impairments in chronic tinnitus are closely connected with psychosomatic and other concomitant symptoms. This overview summarizes some of these studies. Beyond hearing loss, individual interactions of medical and psychosocial stress factors as well as resources are of central importance. Tinnitus related distress reflects a large number of intercorrelated, psychosomatic influences - such as personality traits, stress reactivity and depression or anxiety - which can be accompanied by cognitive difficulties and should be conceptualized and assessed within a vulnerability-stress-reaction model. Superordinate factors such as age, gender or education level can increase vulnerability to stress. Therefore, diagnosis and therapy of chronic tinnitus be individualised, multidimensional and interdisciplinary. Multimodal psychosomatic therapy approaches aim to address individually constellated medical, audiological and psychological influences in order to sustainably increase the quality of life of those affected. Counselling in the first contact is also indispensable for diagnosis and therapy.

[Psychosomatic health inventory: Basic psychosomatic documentation for quality assurance inpatient care]. / Gesundheitsinventar Psychosomatik: Psychosomatische Basisdokumentation zur Qualitätssicherung im stationären Alltag.

Objectives: As part of the quality assurance of inpatient treatment, the severity of the disease and the course of therapy must be mapped. However, there is a high degree of heterogeneity in the implementation of basic diagnostics in psychosomatic facilities.There is a lack of scientifically based standardisation in determining the quality of outcomes. Methods: With the help of scientifically established test instruments, a resource-saving basic documentation instrument was developed. Many existing psychometric instruments were checked for test quality, costs and computer-supported application. Results: The Psychosomatic Health Inventory (gi-ps) consists of three basic modules with a total of 63 items: sociodemography, screening and psychosomatic health status.The latter is represented bymeans of construct-based recording on eight scales. Its collection at admission and discharge allows the presentation of the quality of outcomes.The development of a proprietary software solution with LimeSurvey enables the computer-based collection, evaluation, and storage of data. A list of test inventories for confirming diagnoses and predictors has been compiled, which are recommended for use in clinical routine. Discussion: With the gi-ps, a modular basic documentation instrument including the software solution is available to all interested institutions free of charge.

[Psychosocial Care in the Intensive Care Unit]. / Psychosoziale Betreuung auf der Intensivstation.

The improvement of intensive care treatment options leads to an increasing number of patients being treated in this setting. For the majority of those affected and their relatives, this treatment is associated with tremendous stress, but also subsequent physical, psychological and cognitive impairments, the post-intensive care syndrome. The aim of psychosocial support in the intensive care unit is to stabilise and minimise the acute stress. This is done through care services oriented towards trauma therapy interventions and emergency psychology. Equally central are the needs of the patient's relatives and ways to stabilise and relieve them. The third pillar of psychosocial work in the intensive care unit is the support of the treatment team. Finally, an outlook is given for the specialised aftercare of these complex patients in PICS outpatient clinics.

Comparison of the PROMIS Preference Score (PROPr) and EQ-5D-5L Index Value in General Population Samples in the United Kingdom, France, and Germany.

OBJECTIVES: The Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Preference score (PROPr) can be used to assess health state utility (HSU) and estimate quality-adjusted life-years in cost-effectiveness analyses. It is based on item response theory and promises to overcome limitations of existing HSU scores such as ceiling effects. The PROPr contains 7 PROMIS domains: cognitive abilities, depression, fatigue, pain, physical function, sleep disturbance, and ability to participate in social roles and activities. We aimed to compare the PROPr with the 5-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) in terms of psychometric properties using data from 3 countries. METHODS: We collected PROMIS-29 profile and EQ-5D-5L data from 3 general population samples (United Kingdom = 1509, France = 1501, Germany = 1502). Given that cognition is not assessed by the PROMIS-29, it was predicted by the recommended linear regression model. We compared the convergent validity, known-groups construct validity, and ceiling and floor effects of the PROPr and EQ-5D-5L. RESULTS: The mean PROPr (0.48, 0.53, 0.48; P<.01) and EQ-5D-5L scores (0.82, 0.85, 0.83; P<.01) showed significant differences of similar magnitudes (d = 0.34; d = 0.32; d = 0.35; P<.01) across all samples. The differences were invariant to sex, income, occupation, education, and most conditions but not for age. The Pearson correlation coefficients between both scores were r = 0.74, r = 0.69, and r = 0.72. PROPr's ceiling and floor effects both were minor to moderate. The EQ-5D-5L's ceiling (floor) effects were major (negligible). CONCLUSIONS: Both the EQ-5D-5L and the PROPr assessed by the PROMIS-29 show high validity. The PROPr yields considerably lower HSU values than the EQ-5D-5L. Consequences for quality-adjusted life-year measurements should be investigated in future research.

Frequently Used Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of General Physical Function Were Highly Correlated With a Multitask Performance Outcome Test Battery.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the relationship between frequently used patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and a multitask performance outcome (PerfO) measure of general physical function (PF) and to examine the association of these measures with depressive mood, pain, and age. METHODS: Frequently used PRO measures of general PF (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] PF item bank, PROMIS PF Short Form 20a, Short Form 36 Physical Function Scale) and a PerfO test battery, namely, the Physical Performance Test (PPT), were administered to 78 adult patients from 3 inpatient clinics (cardiology and angiology, rheumatology and clinical immunology, and psychosomatic medicine) at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin. Pearson correlations were used to investigate the associations between PRO measures and the PPT. To explore the predictive value of age, depressive symptoms, and pain intensity, we conducted multiple linear regression analysis for each PF measure. RESULTS: We found strong linear relationships between PRO measures and PPT sum scores. Correlations between PPT sum scores and PROMIS PF T-scores were r > 0.75. For all PRO and PerfO measures, age was a predictor of general PF whereas depressive mood was not found to be a relevant predictor. Moreover, pain intensity was found to be a significant predictor of PRO measures but not for PPT sum scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that frequently used PRO measures and a multitask PerfO measure of general PF can be used to measure a common PF construct. Nevertheless, PF scores based on PRO measures should ideally be controlled for self-rated pain intensity.

EORTC QLQ-C30 general population normative data for Italy by sex, age and health condition: an analysis of 1,036 individuals.

BACKGROUND: General population normative values for the widely used health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measure, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire - Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), are available for a range of countries. These are mostly countries in northern Europe. However, there is still a lack of such normative values for southern Europe. Therefore, this study aims to provide sex-, age- and health condition-specific normative values for the general Italian population for the EORTC QLQ-C30. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study is based on Italian EORTC QLQ-C30 general population data previously collected in an international EORTC project comprising over 15,000 respondents across 15 countries. Recruitment and assessment were carried out via online panels. Quota sampling was used for sex and age groups (18|-|39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69 and ≥ 70 years), separately for each country. We applied weights to match the age and sex distribution in our sample with UN statistics for Italy. Along with descriptive statistics, linear regression models were estimated to describe the associations of sex, age and health condition with the EORTC QLQ-C30 scores. RESULTS: A total of 1,036 respondents from Italy were included in our analyses. The weighted mean age was 49.3 years, and 536 (51.7%) participants were female. Having at least one health condition was reported by 60.7% of the participants. Men reported better scores than women on all EORTC QLQ-C30 scales but diarrhoea. While the impact of age differed across scales, older age was overall associated with better HRQoL as shown by the summary score. For all scales, differences were in favour of participants who did not report any health condition, compared to those who reported at least one. CONCLUSION: The Italian normative values for the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales support the interpretation of HRQoL profiles in Italian cancer populations. The strong impact of health conditions on EORTC QLQ-C30 scores highlights the importance of adjusting for the impact of comorbidities in cancer patients when interpreting HRQoL data.

Spectrum, rate and unmet needs of sociomedical interventions in outpatient psychotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: Psychological disorders often take a long-term course, resulting in impairment in daily life and work. Treatment must therefore target not only symptoms of illness but also capacity limitations and context restrictions, as outlined in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). This includes sociomedical and interdisciplinary interventions like coordination with other specialists, contact to employers and employment agencies, social support agencies, debt counselling, self-help and leisure groups. There are no data on the spectrum, rate and unmet needs of sociomedical interventions in outpatient psychotherapy. METHOD: Following a semistructured interview schedule, 131 psychotherapists in private practice were asked to report on unselected patients. The interviewer assessed to what degree 38 predefined sociomedical interventions were applied so far or should be considered in the future. RESULT: Reports for 322 patients were gathered. All sociomedical interventions were applied, depending on the sick leave status and course of illness. Cognitive behaviour therapists used more sociomedical interventions than psychodynamic therapists. CONCLUSION: The data show that sociomedical interventions are a frequent part of psychotherapy. They are used preferably in patients with participation restrictions. Psychotherapeutic concepts and education should include sociomedical aspects.

[Assessment of Patient-reported Outcomes in Routine Medical Care: Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and Patient-reported Experience Measures (PREMs)]. / Empirische Erfassung patient*innenberichteter Merkmale: PROMs und PREMs.

Information from patients about their own quality of life, experiences in care, and individual assessments of treatment processes and outcomes are becoming increasingly important. Patient-reported characteristics can refer to subjective information about their own health (Patient-Reported Outcome Measures [PROMs]) or to objective information about their experience during the treatment process (Patient-Reported Experience Measures [PREMs]). This article provides an overview of the similarities and differences between PROMs and PREMs. Subsequently, ways to collect PROMs and PREMs are presented and in doing so, an insight into probabilistic testing theory (item response theory) and computer adaptive testing is given. Using national and international initiatives as examples, the implementation of PROMs and PREMs in health care systems is presented and future implementation strategies are discussed within an outlook.