RESUMO
PURPOSE: The modified Rankin Scale (mRS), a clinician-reported outcome measure of global disability, has never been validated in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). The aims of this study are to assess: (1) convergent validity of the mRS; (2) responsiveness of the mRS; and (3) the distribution of mRS scores across patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS: This is a prospective randomized multicenter study. The mRS was scored by a physician for all patients, and subsequently by structured interview for half of the patients and by self-assessment for the other half. All patients completed EuroQoL 5D-5L, RAND-36, Stroke Specific Quality of Life scale (SS-QoL) and Global Perceived Effect (GPE) questionnaires. Convergent validity and responsiveness were assessed by testing hypotheses. RESULTS: In total, 149 patients with aSAH were included for analysis. The correlation of the mRS with EQ-5D-5L was r = - 0.546, while with RAND-36 physical and mental component scores the correlation was r = - 0.439and r = - 0.574 respectively, and with SS-QoL it was r = - 0.671. Three out of four hypotheses for convergent validity were met. The mRS assessed through structured interviews was more highly correlated with the mental component score than with the physical component score of RAND-36. Improvement in terms of GPE was indicated by 83% of patients; the mean change score of these patients on the mRS was - 0.08 (SD 0.915). None of the hypotheses for responsiveness were met. CONCLUSION: The results show that the mRS generally correlates with other instruments, as expected, but it lacks responsiveness. A structured interview of the mRS is best for detecting disabling neuropsychological complaints. REGISTRATION: URL: https://trialsearch.who.int ; Unique identifier: NL7859, Date of first administration: 08-07-2019.
Assuntos
Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Hemorragia Subaracnóidea , Humanos , Hemorragia Subaracnóidea/diagnóstico , Qualidade de Vida/psicologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/psicologia , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) is one of the most frequently used outcome measures in trials in patients with an aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). The assessment method of the mRS is often not clearly described in trials, while the method used might influence the mRS score. The aim of this study is to evaluate the inter-method reliability of different assessment methods of the mRS. METHODS: This is a prospective, randomized, multicenter study with follow-up at 6 weeks and 6 months. Patients aged ≥ 18 years with aSAH were randomized to either a structured interview or a self-assessment of the mRS. Patients were seen by a physician who assigned an mRS score, followed by either the structured interview or the self-assessment. Inter-method reliability was assessed with the quadratic weighted kappa score and percentage of agreement. Assessment of feasibility of the self-assessment was done by a feasibility questionnaire. RESULTS: The quadratic weighted kappa was 0.60 between the assessment of the physician and structured interview and 0.56 between assessment of the physician and self-assessment. Percentage agreement was, respectively, 50.8 and 19.6%. The assessment of the mRS through a structured interview and by self-assessment resulted in systematically higher mRS scores than the mRS scored by the physician. Self-assessment of the mRS was proven feasible. DISCUSSION: The mRS scores obtained with different assessment methods differ significantly. The agreement between the scores is low, although the reliability between the assessment methods is good. This should be considered when using the mRS in clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.trialregister.nl ; Unique identifier: NL7859.
Assuntos
Hemorragia Subaracnóidea , Humanos , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Estudos Prospectivos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Hemorragia Subaracnóidea/diagnóstico , Hemorragia Subaracnóidea/terapia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
PURPOSE: The primary objective of this systematic review is to compare the outcome after decompression with and without concomitant instrumented fusion in patients with lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Does adding fusion to simple decompression lead to better results? METHODS: PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Cochrane, Web of Science, CINAHL and Academic Search Premier were searched. All studies comparing outcome of decompression alone to decompression with concomitant-instrumented fusion in patients suffering from symptomatic lumbar stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis were included. Risk of bias was assessed using an adapted version of the Cowley checklist. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included in the analysis involving 3119 patients in total. In the majority of studies, including two RCTs, clinical outcome of both patient groups was comparable regarding most clinical outcome measures. CONCLUSION: Currently there is not enough evidence that adding instrumented fusion to a decompression leads to superior outcomes compared to decompression only in patients with lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. The most important clinical outcome measures, including the ODI, show comparable results. Therefore, the least invasive and least costly procedure, being decompression alone, is preferred in patients with low-grade spondylolisthesis with predominant leg pain. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Assuntos
Descompressão Cirúrgica , Vértebras Lombares/cirurgia , Procedimentos Ortopédicos , Estenose Espinal , Espondilolistese/complicações , Humanos , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Estenose Espinal/etiologia , Estenose Espinal/cirurgiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Thoracoscopic oesophagectomy was introduced to reduce the morbidity of transthoracic oesophagectomy. The aim was to assess the short- and mid-term results of robot-assisted thoracoscopic oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer. METHODS: Between October 2003 and May 2007, 47 patients with resectable oesophageal cancer underwent robot-assisted thoracoscopic oesophagectomy. Clinical data were collected prospectively. RESULTS: Conversion to thoracotomy was necessary in seven patients. Median operating time was 450 min and median blood loss 625 ml. Median postoperative ventilation time was 1 day, intensive care stay 3 days and hospital stay 18 days. Twenty-one of 47 patients had pulmonary complications. Three patients died in hospital. A median of 29 (range 8-68) lymph nodes was dissected and R0 resection was achieved in 36 patients. Twenty-three patients had stage IVa disease. After a median follow-up of 35 months, median disease-free survival was 15 (95 per cent confidence interval 12 to 18) months. CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted thoracoscopic oesophagectomy was oncologically acceptable. Operating time, blood loss and pulmonary complications might decrease with further experience.