DEprescribing: Perceptions of PAtients living with advanced cancer. A multicentre, prospective mixed observational study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Polypharmacy in patients with advanced cancer represents a major public health problem, leading to risk of iatrogenesis, decrease of quality of life and increase of healthcare costs. In the field of geriatrics, health policies have been developed to address polypharmacy through the use of deprescribing tools. Recently, palliative care initiatives have been introduced, yet these have not fully considered the specificities of this population, particularly their perceptions. It is therefore important to better understand patients' perceptions of deprescribing in order to adapt tools and actions to make these approaches more effective. OBJECTIVES: The aim is to investigate patients' perceptions of deprescribing in palliative oncology care, and to explore factors that may influence patients' attitudes and beliefs about deprescribing and to validate a specific questionnaire (rPATD) in this population. An ancillary study will investigate the relationship between patients' health literacy and their perception of deprescribing. METHOD: A prospective, observational, multicenter study will be conducted using a sequential mixed exploratory design in a population of patients living with advanced cancer and with a physician-estimated life expectancy of less than 1 year. The study will include an initial qualitative phase. Individual semi-structured interviews using a descriptive approach (thematic analysis) will be conducted (upon saturation). Following analysis of the qualitative data, a quantitative study including 300 patients will be realized to meet secondary objectives. Several data will be collected and 2 self-questionnaires will be administered: the BMQ (beliefs about medicine) and rPATD (perception of deprescribing) possibly supplemented by additional items if required by the qualitative analysis. The auxiliary study will be conducted during this second phase, using a validated self-questionnaire to assess patients' level of literacy. CONCLUSION: The disparate outcomes will facilitate the understanding of the perception of deprescribing in palliative oncology care, enabling the development of tailored approaches adapted to this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials Identifier: NCT06193083.

Translation, validity and reliability of the pain attitudes and beliefs scale for physiotherapists in French.

BACKGROUND: The Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS-PT) questionnaire evaluates manual therapists' biomedical and biopsychosocial beliefs regarding the management of chronic low back pain. Its usage in clinical settings is an important step in the implementation of national guidelines and policies to improve patient management. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to translate the PABS-PT questionnaire into French, to adapt it culturally, and to conduct a psychometric analysis. DESIGN: Qualitative and cross-sectional study. METHOD: The translation process followed published guidelines with cross-cultural validation by an expert committee. We followed a forward and backward translation procedure and an expert committee, including the original author of the questionnaire and a linguistics expert ensuring good cultural adaptation, issued a finalised version. Psychometric analysis of the French version of the questionnaire was conducted among 390 French manual therapists in two phases. The first phase evaluated structural validity as well as external validity compared with the TSK and BBQ questionnaires. Then, reliability and scalability were analysed. The second phase evaluated test-retest reproducibility by sending the same questionnaire 3 months later. RESULTS: The validity study revealed three subscales: the classic biomedical subscale and two subscales for biopsychosocial beliefs (aetiology of pain and physical activity). With 21 items in total for the PABS-PT-FR, the structural validity scores were good (BM: alpha = 0.82, H = 0.38; Physical Activity: alpha = 0.62, H = 0.32; Aetiology of Pain: alpha = 0.55, H = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a validated tool to assess French physiotherapists' and, more generally, healthcare providers' beliefs about chronic low back pain, with a new insight into the BPS subscale internal construct.

Efficacy and comparison of corticosteroids only and corticosteroids with plasmapheresis or intravenous immunoglobulin for the treatment of optic neuritis in demyelinating disease: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of treatment of optic neuritis (ON) with corticosteroids (CTC) alone, CTC+plasmapheresis (PLP), and CTC+intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). DESIGN: After an episode of ON, although visual recovery is usually good, some patients may have significant visual sequelae. While the efficacy of first-line CTC is now indisputable, there is no consensus on the nature of second-line treatment. To date, no systematic review has compared the efficacy of treatment of ON with CTC alone, CTC+plasmapheresis (PLP), and CTC+intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). A meta-analysis is needed to compare the efficacy of PLP and IVIG in steroid-resistant ON. METHODS: This systematic review included all studies comparing at least two of the three treatments for steroid-resistant ON (CTC alone, CTC+PLP, and CTC+IVIG). From all articles published on PubMed between January 2000 and June 2022, two independent ophthalmologists selected studies of interest using the PRISMA method. Methodology, patient characteristics, and outcomes were identified. A network metaanalysis was then performed to compare the efficacy of the three treatments. RESULTS: Six comparative studies were included, representing 209 patients. The percentage of significant visual recovery after CTC alone, CTC+PLP, and CTC+IVIG in the acute treatment of steroid-resistant ON was 30 %, 45 %, and 77 %, respectively. Comparison of CTC+IVIG vs CTC alone, CTC+PLP vs CTC only, and CTC+PLP vs CTC+IVIG yielded odds ratios of 12.81, 2.47, and 0.19 respectively. CONCLUSION: Treatment of steroid-resistant ON with CTC+PLP or CTC+IVIG is more effective than treatment with CTC alone. Although no study has directly compared the two treatments, IVIG may be more effective than PLP.

Definitions and assessments of recovery from gambling disorder: A scoping review.

Background and aims: While the concept of recovery is receiving increasing attention in the context of gambling disorder (GD), no consensus has yet been reached regarding its definition. This scoping review aims to map the literature on GD recovery, identify gaps, and provide insights for a more holistic and patient-centred perspective. Methods: A systematic search of three databases was conducted (PubMed, PsycINFO, and ScienceDirect). Based on the method by which the results of these studies were produced, the studies included were sorted into four categories (quantitative, instrument validation, qualitative, and mixed studies) and subsequently examined using conceptual analysis. Results: One hundred thirteen articles were included in this research after the screening process. In the quantitative and instrument validation studies, recovery was defined or operationalized in terms of abstinence, the absence of a GD diagnosis, or mild GD severity, or by reference to treatment outcomes or controlled gambling. A meta-synthesis of the results of the qualitative studies revealed four core features of recovery (insight, empowerment and commitment, wellbeing enhancement, and reconsideration of the issue of relapse). Discussion: Discrepancies in definitions, outcomes, and variables used were evident across studies. Additionally, the quantitative and standardized approaches employed in most studies exhibited severe limitations with regard to defining recovery from the subjective and multidimensional perspectives of people recovering from GD. Conclusions: This lack of definitional clarity emphasizes the necessity for further qualitative research. This research should encompass multiple stakeholder perspectives to develop a working definition promoting recovery from a holistic, patient-centred, and tailored approach.

Equating and linking Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-item questionnaire and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey domains using Rasch modeling.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a simple, practical methodology to equate or link equivalent domains of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-item questionnaire (PROMIS-29) using the Rasch framework. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: In April 2016, the PROMIS-29 and SF-36 were completed by 1501 individuals selected to be representative of the French population. For each domain common to the two questionnaires, a Partial Credit Model was fitted to the items related to that dimension in the two questionnaires. These items were then calibrated on the same metric, which enabled the scores from one questionnaire to be associated with the scores from the other. RESULTS: Six of the seven PROMIS-29 scales and five of the six SF-36 subscales (physical, pain, social, vitality, depression and anxiety domains) were equated or linked. Correspondence tables between scores, with a 95% confidence interval, were established for each domain. A freely available Stata macro program was developed to automatize the equating or linking process. CONCLUSION: These results should facilitate comparisons across studies using the SF-36 and the PROMIS-29 in France. The equating or linking process developed is simple to implement and can be used in other countries and for other instruments.