Population-based incidence rates of 15 neuromuscular disorders: a nationwide capture-recapture study in the Netherlands.

Most neuromuscular disorders are rare, but as a group they are not. Nevertheless, epidemiological data of specific neuromuscular disorders are scarce, especially on the incidence. We applied a capture-recapture approach to a nationwide hospital-based dataset and a patients association-based dataset to estimate the annual incidence rates for fifteen neuromuscular disorders in the Netherlands. The annual incidence rates per 100,000 population varied from 0.03/100,000 (95% CI 0.00 ‒ 0.06) for glycogenosis type 5 to 0.9/100,000 (95% confidence interval 0.7 ‒ 1.0) for myotonic dystrophy type 1. The summed annual incidence rate of these disorders was 4.1 per 100,000 per population. Nine of the provided incidence rates were previously unavailable, three rates were similar to the rates in the literature, and three rates were generally higher compared to previous findings but with overlapping confidence intervals. This study provides nationwide incidence rates for fifteen neuromuscular disorders predominantly diagnosed in adult life, nine which were previously unavailable. The capture-recapture approach provided estimates of the total number of individuals with neuromuscular disorders. To complete the gaps in the knowledge of disease frequencies, there is a need for estimates from an automated, obligatory data collection system of diagnosed and newly diagnosed patients with neuromuscular disorders.

Toward a Useful and Cost-Effective Workup in Chronic Polyneuropathy: The EXPRESS Study Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge gaps exist about the usefulness and extent of blood tests and nerve conduction studies in the workup of polyneuropathy. We hypothesize that a limited workup improves costs spent on diagnostics without loss of diagnostic reliability or disadvantageous effect on treatment choice in many patients with a clinical diagnosis of chronic polyneuropathy. We aim to determine which investigations are necessary in the workup of patients with suspected chronic polyneuropathy clinically diagnosed by neurologists in an outpatient clinic and will perform an early health technology assessment. METHODS: This is a prospective multicenter quality in healthcare evaluation. We compare two diagnostic strategies, both performed on all participants: the standard care by each patient's neurologist and the proposed (limited) workup by the study panel members consisting of neurologists with experience in neuromuscular diseases. RESULTS: The primary outcome is the effectiveness of a limited workup expressed as concordance between the patient's neurologist diagnosis and the panel diagnosis. This will be related to differences in costs and impact on treatment or patient management otherwise. Other outcomes are burden/gain for the patient in terms of number of investigations, time to diagnosis, hospital visits, sick leave, loss of productivity, expenses, experienced quality of care. CONCLUSION: This multicenter prospective observational study on quality in health care will provide improved evidence about the components of a cost-effective workup for patients with chronic polyneuropathy.