Patient expectations, experiences and satisfaction with nintedanib and pirfenidone in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a quantitative study.

BACKGROUND: Two antifibrotic drugs, nintedanib and pirfenidone, are available for treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Although efficacy and adverse events have been well studied, little is known about patient experiences with these drugs. We aimed to systematically and quantitatively evaluate patient expectations, experiences, and satisfaction with nintedanib and pirfenidone. Furthermore, we assessed which factors were associated with overall patient satisfaction with medication. METHODS: Outpatients with IPF prospectively completed the Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medication (PESaM) questionnaire before start, and after three and 6 months of antifibrotic treatment, as part of a randomized eHealth trial (NCT03420235). The PESaM questionnaire consists of an expectation module, a validated generic module evaluating patient experiences and satisfaction concerning the effectiveness, side-effects, and ease of use of a medication, and a disease-specific module about IPF. Satisfaction was scored on a scale from - 5 (very dissatisfied) to + 5 (very satisfied). RESULTS: In total, 90 patients were included, of whom 43% used nintedanib and 57% pirfenidone. After 6 months, the mean overall score for satisfaction with medication was 2.1 (SD 1.9). No differences were found in experiences and satisfaction with medication, and the number and severity of side-effects between nintedanib and pirfenidone. Perceived effectiveness of medication was rated as significantly more important than side-effects and ease of use (p = 0.001). Expectations of patients regarding effectiveness were higher than experiences after 6 months. Self-reported experience with effectiveness was the main factor associated with overall medication satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Patient experiences and satisfaction with antifibrotic treatment were fairly positive, and similar for nintedanib and pirfenidone. Systematic evaluation of patient expectations, experiences, and satisfaction with medication could enhance shared-decision making and guide drug treatment decisions in the future. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03420235 .

Cost-effectiveness of immediate versus delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery in the Netherlands (the BICAT-NL study): study design of a prospective multicenter randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cataract surgery is one of the most frequently performed types of surgery. Most patients suffer from bilateral cataract and while cataract surgery of only one eye is effective in restoring functional vision, second-eye surgery leads to further improvements in health-related quality of life, and is cost-effective. At present, most patients undergo cataract surgery in both eyes on separate days as recommended in national guidelines, referred to as delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery (DSBCS). An alternative procedure involves operating both eyes on the same day, but as separate procedures, known as immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS). The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and costs of ISBCS compared to DSBCS, in order to test the hypothesis that ISBCS is non-inferior to DSBCS in terms of effectiveness and superior to ISBCS in terms of cost-effectiveness. METHODS/DESIGN: Multicenter non-inferiority randomised controlled clinical trial. Patients (18 years or older) with bilateral cataract and an indication for bilateral cataract surgery with an expected uncomplicated intraoperative and postoperative course are included in the study. Patients are randomly assigned to either ISBCS or DSBCS. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with a refractive outcome in the second eye within 1.0 dioptre from the target refraction, at 4 weeks after surgery. Secondary outcomes include corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity, complications, patient reported outcomes (PROMs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact. Follow-up visits are planned at 1 week after first-eye surgery and 4 weeks after second-eye surgery. At 3 months after first-eye surgery, the occurrence of complications is checked and patients fill in a final questionnaire. DISCUSSION: This study protocol describes the design of a multicenter non-inferiority randomised controlled trial. Current studies on ISBCS often lack information on safety regarding refractive outcomes. In addition, there is a lack of well-designed cost-effectiveness studies using established methods. The BICAT-NL study will provide more insight in refractive and cost-effectiveness outcomes for ISBCS compared to DSBCS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was prospectively registered at Clinicaltrials.gov on January 17th 2018. (Identifier: NCT03400124 .

European Society of Coloproctology Core Outcome Set for haemorrhoidal disease: an international Delphi study among healthcare professionals.

AIM: There is considerable heterogeneity in outcomes in studies reporting on the treatment of haemorrhoidal disease (HD). The aim of this study was to develop a Core Outcome Set (COS) for HD in cooperation with the European Society of Coloproctology. METHOD: A Delphi study was performed according to the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) methodology. In total 38 healthcare professionals and 30 patients were invited to the panel. Previously, 10 outcome domains and 59 outcomes were identified through a systematic literature review. In this study, these domains and outcomes were formed into one questionnaire for healthcare professionals and a separate questionnaire for patients. Sequential questionnaire rounds prioritizing the domains and outcomes were conducted. Panel members were asked to rate the appropriateness of each domain and outcome on a nine-point Likert scale. During a face-to-face meeting, healthcare professionals agreed on the primary and secondary end-points of the COS for HD. Finally, a short survey was sent to the healthcare professionals in order to reach consensus on how the chosen end-points should be assessed and at which time points. RESULTS: The response rate in questionnaire round 1 for healthcare professionals was 44.7% (n = 17). Sixteen out of 17 healthcare professionals also completed the questionnaire in round 2. The response rate for the patient questionnaire was 60% (n = 18). Seventeen healthcare professionals participated in the face-to-face meeting. The questionnaire rounds did not result in a clear-cut selection of primary and secondary end-points. Most domains and outcomes were considered important, and only three outcomes were excluded. During the face-to-face meeting, agreement was reached to select the domain 'symptoms' as primary end-point, and 'complications', 'recurrence' and 'patient satisfaction' as secondary end-points in the COS for HD. Furthermore, consensus was reached that the domain 'symptoms' should be a patient reported outcome measure and should include the outcomes 'pain' and 'prolapse', 'itching', 'soiling' and 'blood loss'. The domain 'complications' should include the outcomes 'incontinence', 'abscess', 'urinary retention', 'anal stenosis' and 'fistula'. Consensus was reached to use 'reappearance of initial symptoms' as reported by the patient to define recurrence. During an additional short survey, consensus was reached that 'incontinence' should be assessed by the Wexner Fecal Incontinence Score, 'abscess' by physical examination, 'urinary retention' by ultrasonography, 'anal stenosis' by physical examination, and 'fistula' by physical examination and MR imaging if inconclusive. During follow-up, the outcome 'symptoms' should be assessed at baseline, 7 days, 6 weeks and 1 year post-procedure. The outcomes 'abscess' and 'urinary retention' should be assessed 7 days post-procedure and 'incontinence', 'anal stenosis' and 'fistula' 1 year post-procedure. CONCLUSIONS: We developed the first European Society of Coloproctology COS for HD based on an international Delphi study among healthcare professionals. The next step is to incorporate the patients' perspective in the COS. Use of this COS may improve the quality and uniformity of future research and enhance the analysis of evidence.

A multi-center, double blind randomized controlled trial evaluating flap fixation after mastectomy using sutures or tissue glue versus conventional closure: protocol for the Seroma reduction After Mastectomy (SAM) trial.

BACKGROUND: Seroma formation is a common complication after mastectomy and is associated with delayed wound healing, infection, skin flap necrosis, patient discomfort and repeated visits to the out patient clinic to deal with seroma and its sequelae. Closing the dead space after mastectomy seems to be key in reducing seroma and its complications. Various methods have been described to reduce the dead space after mastectomy: closed suction drainage, quilting of the skin flaps and application of adhesive tissue glues. The aim of this trial is to compare seroma formation and its sequelae in the various methods of flap fixation. METHODS: This is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial in female breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy, with or without axillary clearance. Exclusion criteria consist of breast conserving therapy, direct breast reconstruction and incapacity to comprehend implications and extent of study and unable to sign for informed consent. A total of 336 patients will be randomized. Patients will be randomly allocated to one of three treatment arms consisting of flap fixation using ARTISS tissue glue with a low suction drain, flap fixation using sutures and a low suction drain or conventional wound closure (without flap fixation) and low suction drainage. Follow up will be conducted up to twelve months post surgery. The primary outcome is the number of seroma aspirations and secondary outcomes consist of number of out patient clinic visits, surgical skin infection rate, shoulder function, cosmesis, health-related quality of life and costs and cost-effectiveness (cost/QALY). DISCUSSION: This is the first study of its kind to evaluate the effect of flap fixation and its sequelae (ie seroma aspirations, number of out patient clinic visits, infection, shoulder function, patient assessed cosmesis, quality of life and cost-effectiveness) in a double blind randomized controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was approved by the hospitals' joint medical ethical committee (14-T-21, 2 June 2014). The SAM Trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov since October 2017, Identifier: NCT03305757 .

Towards a core outcome set for hemorrhoidal disease-a systematic review of outcomes reported in literature.

PURPOSE: Previously published literature regarding treatment of hemorrhoidal disease (HD) revealed a lack of uniform defined outcomes. These differences between outcomes among studies limit transparency and lead to incomparability of results. The aim of this study was to systematically list the types of outcomes used in HD studies. This list will be used to develop a core outcome set. METHODS: We searched Medline (Pubmed), Embase (OVID), and Cochrane for interventional studies for adult patients with HD. Two authors independently identified and reviewed eligible studies. This resulted in a list of outcomes reported by each clinical trial. All outcomes were categorized using the conceptual framework OMERACT filter 2.0. RESULTS: A total of 34 randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies were included in this study. A total of 59 different types of outcomes were identified. On average, 5.8 different outcomes (range 2-8) were used per study. The outcomes were structured into three core areas and10 ten domains. The most commonly reported core area was pathophysiological manifestations including the domain symptoms, complications, and recurrence. The most frequently reported outcomes were pain (91%), blood loss (94%), prolapse (71%), and incontinence (56%). There was a high variation in definitions of the common outcomes. And often there was no definition at all. CONCLUSION: This study shows a substantial heterogeneity in the types of outcomes in HD studies. We provided an overview of the types of outcomes reported in HD studies and identified a list of potentially relevant outcomes required for the development of a COS.

Sacral neuromodulation versus personalized conservative treatment in patients with idiopathic slow-transit constipation: study protocol of the No.2-trial, a multicenter open-label randomized controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis.

PURPOSE: The evidence regarding the (cost-)effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) in patients with therapy-resistant idiopathic slow-transit constipation is of suboptimal quality. The Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports has granted conditional reimbursement for SNM treatment. The objective is to assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and budget impact of SNM compared to personalized conservative treatment (PCT) in patients with idiopathic slow-transit constipation refractory to conservative treatment. METHODS: This study is an open-label, multicenter randomized controlled trial. Patients aged 14 to 80 with slow-transit constipation, a defecation frequency (DF) < 3 per week and meeting at least one other Rome-IV criterion, are eligible. Patients with obstructed outlet, irritable bowel syndrome, bowel pathology, or rectal prolapse are excluded. Patients are randomized to SNM or PCT. The primary outcome is success at 6 months (DF ≥ 3 a week), requiring a sample size of 64 (α = 0.05, ß = 0.80, 30% difference in success). Secondary outcomes are straining, sense of incomplete evacuation, constipation severity, fatigue, constipation specific and generic quality of life, and costs at 6 months. Long-term costs and effectiveness will be estimated by a decision analytic model. The time frame is 57 months, starting October 2016. SNM treatment costs are funded by the Dutch conditional reimbursement program, research costs by Medtronic. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this trial will be used to make a final decision regarding reimbursement of SNM from the Dutch Health Care Package in this patient group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov , identifier NCT02961582, on 12 October 2016.

Protocol for the development of a Core Outcome Set (COS) for hemorrhoidal disease: an international Delphi study.

PURPOSE: Over the last decade, many studies were performed regarding treatment options for hemorrhoidal disease. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) should have well-defined primary and secondary outcomes. However, the reported outcome measures are numerous and diverse. The heterogeneity of outcome definition in clinical trials limits transparency and paves the way for bias. The development of a core outcome set (COS) helps minimizing this problem. A COS is an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials of a specific disease. The aim of this project is to generate a COS regarding the outcome of treatment after hemorrhoidal disease. METHODS: A Delphi study will be performed by an international steering group healthcare professionals and patients with the intention to create a standard outcome set for future clinical trials for the treatment of hemorrhoidal disease. First, a literature review will be conducted to establish which outcomes are used in clinical trials for hemorrhoidal disease. Secondly, both healthcare professionals and patients will participate in several consecutive rounds of online questionnaires and a face-to-face meeting to refine the content of the COS. DISCUSSION: Development of a COS for hemorrhoidal disease defines a minimum outcome-reporting standard and will improve the quality of research in the future.

Cost-effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation for chronic refractory constipation in children and adolescents: a Markov model analysis.

AIM: This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) compared with conservative treatment in children and adolescents with constipation refractory to conservative management. METHOD: A Markov probabilistic model was used, comparing costs and effectiveness of SNM and conservative treatment in children and adolescents aged 10-18 years with constipation refractory to conservative management. Input for the model regarding transition probabilities, utilities and healthcare costs was based on data from a cohort of patients treated in our centre. This cohort consisted of 30 female patients (mean age 16 years) with functional constipation refractory to conservative management. The mean duration of laxative use in this group was 5.9 years. All patients had a test SNM, followed by a permanent SNM in 27/30. Median follow-up was 22.1 months (range 12.2-36.8). The model was run to simulate a follow-up period of 3 years. RESULTS: The mean cumulative costs for the SNM group and the conservative treatment group were €17 789 (SD €2492) and €7574 (SD €4332) per patient, respectively. The mean quality adjusted life years (QALYs) in the SNM group was 1.74 (SD 0.19), compared with 0.86 (SD 0.14) in the conservatively managed group. The mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €12 328 per QALY (SD €4788). Sensitivity analysis showed that the outcomes were robust to a wide range of model assumptions. CONCLUSION: Chronic constipation seriously affects the quality of life of children and adolescents. Preliminary evidence suggests that SNM can improve symptoms and quality of life at a reasonable cost.

Cost-effectiveness of embryo transfer strategies: a decision analytic model using long-term costs and consequences of singletons and multiples born as a consequence of IVF.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the cost-effectiveness of elective single embryo transfer (eSET) versus double embryo transfer (DET) strategies from a societal perspective, when applying a time horizon of 1, 5 and 18 years? SUMMARY ANSWER: From a short-term perspective (1 year) it is cost-effective to replace DET with single embryo transfer; however when intermediate- (5 years) and long-term (18 years) costs and consequences are incorporated, DET becomes the most cost-effective strategy, given a ceiling ratio of €20 000 per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: According to previous cost-effectiveness research into embryo transfer strategies, DET is considered cost-effective if society is willing to pay around €20 000 for an extra live birth. However, interpretation of those studies is complicated, as those studies fail to incorporate long-term costs and outcomes and used live birth as a measure of effectiveness instead of QALYs. With this outcome, both multiple and singletons were valued as one live birth, whereas costs of all children of a multiple were incorporated. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A Markov model (cycle length: 1 year; time horizon: 1, 5 and 18 years) was developed comparing a maximum of: (i) three cycles of eSET in all patients; (ii) four cycles of eSET in all patients; (iii) five cycles of eSET in all patients; (iv) three cycles of standard treatment policy (STP), i.e. eSET in women <38 years with a good quality embryo, and DET in all other women; and (v) three cycles of DET in all patients. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Expected life years (LYs), child QALYs and costs were estimated for all comparators. Input parameters were derived from a retrospective cohort study, in which hospital resource data were collected (n=580) and a parental questionnaire was sent out (431 respondents). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (5000 iterations) was performed. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: With a time horizon of 18 years, DETx3 is most effective (0.54 live births, 10.2 LYs and 9.8 QALYs) and expensive (€37 871) per couple starting IVF. Three cycles of eSET are least effective (0.43 live births, 7.1 LYs and 6.8 QALYs) and expensive (€25 563). We assumed that society is willing to pay €20 000 per QALY gained. With a time horizon of 1 year, eSETx3 was the most cost-effective embryo transfer strategy with a probability of being cost-effective of 99.9%. With a time horizon of 5 or 18 years, DETx3 was most cost-effective, with probabilities of being cost-effective of 77.3 and 93.2%, respectively. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This is the first study to use QALYs generated by the children in the economic evaluation of embryo transfer strategies. There remains some disagreement on whether QALYs generated by new life should be used in economic evaluations of fertility treatment. A further limitation is that treatment ends when it results in live birth and that only child QALYs were considered as measure of effectiveness. The results for the time horizon of 18 years might be less solid, as the data beyond the age of 8 years are based on extrapolation. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The current Markov model indicates that when child QALYs are used as measure of outcome it is not cost-effective on the long term to replace DET with single embryo transfer strategies. However, for a balanced approach, a family-planning perspective would be preferable, including additional treatment cycles for couples who wish to have another child. Furthermore, the analysis should be extended to include QALYs of family members. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was supported by a research grant (grant number 80-82310-98-09094) from the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw). There are no conflicts of interest in connection with this article. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

Planning the mode of delivery for twin pregnancies: A web-based questionnaire.

Using orthogonal design, we created a questionnaire containing 16 cases of twin pregnancies. For each case, respondents indicated whether they would plan a vaginal delivery (VD) or a caesarean section (CS). We assessed the association between each variable (maternal age, parity, mode of conception, gestational age, chorionicity, body mass index, foetal growth, foetal presentation and wish for additional children) and the planned mode of delivery. A VD was planned mostly for vertex presentation of twin A (vertex-vertex vs. non-vertex-vertex, odds ratio [OR]: 0.002, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.001-0.003, p < 0.001). For vertex- non-vertex (vs. vertex-vertex) presentation, chances on planning a VD decreased threefold (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.018-0.46, p < 0.001), although the majority of respondents would still plan a VD. In multiparous (vs. nulliparous) women, VD was chosen more often (OR: 3.24, 95% CI: 2.50-4.18, p < 0.001).Vertex presentation of twin A and multiparity were the main reasons for planning a VD.

Quality of life outcomes in women with endometriosis are highly influenced by recruitment strategies.

STUDY QUESTION: To what extent are outcome measures in endometriosis-related quality of life studies influenced by the setting in which patient recruitment is performed? SUMMARY ANSWER: Quality of life outcomes in women with endometriosis are highly influenced by recruitment strategies. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Most studies on quality of life in women with endometriosis are conducted in tertiary care centres or patient associations. It is conceivable that the setting in which patient recruitment is performed influences the quality of life results. This has not been investigated before. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Retrospective questionnaire based cohort study (part of the World Endometriosis Research Foundation (WERF) EndoCost study). The investigated women were recruited in three settings: a tertiary care centre for endometriosis (n = 135); five secondary care centres (n = 63); an endometriosis patient association (n = 291). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The secondary and tertiary care population included women with a laparoscopic and/or histological diagnosis of endometriosis. The patient association population consisted of women with a self-reported diagnosis of surgically confirmed endometriosis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The populations did not differ in terms of age, co-morbidities and education level. Delay of diagnosis was the longest in the patient association (median 7 years) (tertiary care 2 years; secondary care 1.5 years) (P < 0.001). The tertiary care population reported more laparotomies (64%) than the other populations (secondary care 43%; patient association 47%) (P = 0.002). Affected job was least prevalent in the secondary care setting (35%) (patient association 64%; tertiary care 56%) (P < 0.001). Affected relationships were most prevalent in the patient association setting (52%) (tertiary care 38%; secondary care 22%) (P < 0.001). Chronic pain was least prevalent in patients in secondary care (44%) (tertiary care 65%; patient association 61%) (P = 0.009). Substantial differences in quality of life were detected between secondary care (median physical component 50.4, mental component 49.6); tertiary care (physical component 46.2, mental component 46.2) and the patient association (physical component 45.0, mental component 44.6) (P < 0.001, P = 0.018). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The response rate was relatively low (35%). Analysis of the hospital populations revealed that non-responders and responders did not differ with respect to age or revised American Fertility Society classification, indicating that the non-responder bias is limited. However, other factors, such as social and marital status or symptomatology, might be different for non-responders. Missing values were analysed as if the symptom was not present. Missing values never exceeded 10%, except for one value. Therefore, it can be expected that the effect of missing data on the outcome is negligible. Twenty-five patients belonged to more than one category. A sensitivity analysis showed that the influence of assigning patients to another category was limited. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Outcomes regarding quality of life are highly influenced by recruitment strategy. None of the groups appeared to be a representative selection of the total population of women with endometriosis. An alternative strategy for creating a representative population for cost and quality of life studies is probably to recruit women who live in a specific geographic area rather than women that visit a specific hospital or are a member of a patient association. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The WERF EndoCost study was funded by the World Endometriosis Research Foundation. The sponsors did not have a role in the design and conduct of this study: collection, management, analysis, interpretation of the data; preparation, review, approval of the manuscript. L.H. is the chief executive and T.M.D. was a board member of WERF at the time of funding. T.M.D holds the Merck-Serono Chair and the Ferring Chair in Reproductive Medicine in Leuven, Belgium and has served as consultant for Merck-Serono, Schering-Plough, Astellas, and Arresto. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

Hospital costs during the first 5 years of life for multiples compared with singletons born after IVF or ICSI.

STUDY QUESTION: Do in vitro fertilization (IVF) multiples generate higher hospital costs than IVF singletons, from birth up to age 5? SUMMARY ANSWER: Hospital costs from birth up to age 5 were significantly higher among IVF/ICSI multiple children compared with IVF/ICSI singletons; however, when excluding the costs incurred during the birth admission period, hospital costs of multiples and singletons were comparable. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Concern has risen over the long-term outcome of children born after IVF. The increased incidence of multiple births in IVF as a result of double-embryo transfer predisposes children to a poorer neonatal outcome such as preterm birth and low birthweight. As a consequence, IVF multiples require more medical care. Costs and consequences of poorer neonatal outcomes in multiples may also exist later in life. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: All 5497 children born from IVF in 2003-2005, whose parents received IVF or ICSI treatment in one of five participating Dutch IVF centers, served as a basis for a retrospective cohort study. Based on gestational age, birthweight, Apgar and congenital malformation, children were assigned to one of three risk strata (low-, moderate- or high-risk). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: To enhance the efficiency of the data collection, 816 multiples and 584 singletons were selected for 5-year follow-up based on stratified (risk) sampling. Parental informed consent was received of 322 multiples and 293 singletons. Individual-level hospital resource use data (hospitalization, outpatient visits and medical procedures) were retrieved from hospital information systems and patient charts for 302 multiples and 278 singletons. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The risk of hospitalization (OR 4.9, 95% CI 3.3-7.0), outpatient visits (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.8-3.6) and medical procedures (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.2) was higher for multiples compared with singletons. The average hospital costs amounted to €10 018 and €2093 during the birth admission period (P < 0.001), €1131 and €696 after the birth admission period to the first birthday (not significant (n.s.)) and €1084 and €938 from the second to the fifth life year (n.s.) for multiples and singletons, respectively. Hospital costs from birth up to age 5 were 3.3-fold higher for multiples compared with singletons (P < 0.001). Among multiples and singletons, respectively, 90.8 and 76.2% of the total hospital costs were caused by hospital admission days and 8.9 and 25.2% of the total hospital costs during the first 5 years of life occurred after the first year of life. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Resource use and costs outside the hospital were not included in the analysis. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study confirms the increased use of healthcare resources by IVF/ICSI multiples compared with IVF/ICSI singletons. Single-embryo transfer may result in substantial savings, particularly in the birth admission period. These savings need to be compared with the extra costs of additional embryo transfers needed to achieve a successful pregnancy. Besides costs, health outcomes of children born after single-embryo transfer should be compared with those born after double-embryo transfer. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was supported by a research grant (grant number 80-82310-98-09094) from the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw). There are no conflicts of interest in connection with this article. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

Do patients prefer mesh or anterior colporrhaphy for primary correction of anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a labelled discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated patients' preferences for anterior colporrhaphy or mesh surgery as surgical correction of anterior vaginal wall prolapse. DESIGN: Labelled discrete choice experiment. SETTING: Three Dutch teaching hospitals. POPULATION: Women with anterior vaginal wall prolapse Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage 2 or more, indicated for anterior colporrhaphy (n = 100). METHODS: Discrete choice experiments are an attribute-based survey method for measuring preferences. In this experiment, women were asked to choose between two treatment scenarios, mesh surgery or anterior colporrhaphy. These surgical treatments differed in four treatment attributes: (i) recurrence rate, (ii) exposure rate, (iii) infection rate, (iv) dyspareunia. Data were analysed using a multinomial logit model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Women's preferences for anterior colporrhaphy or mesh surgery for the repair of vaginal wall prolapse. RESULTS: All treatment attributes, i.e. recurrence, exposure, infection and dyspareunia, proved to be significant in the woman's decision to choose mesh surgery (P < 0.001), while only two attributes out of three, recurrence and infection, were significant for anterior colporrhaphy (P < 0.001). The relative importance data showed that with regards to the four statistically significant attributes for mesh, dyspareunia was the most important attribute, and of the two significant attributes for anterior colporrhaphy, the risk of infection. Based on the attributes and levels in our discrete choice experiment, anterior colporrhaphy was preferred in 74% as a primary correction of anterior vaginal wall prolapse, followed by a preference for mesh in 26% of all choices. CONCLUSION: This study showed that next to the risk of recurrence, other aspects like risk of infection, dyspareunia and exposure play a role in the woman's preference for a surgical treatment. In addition, our results indicate that anterior colporrhaphy is preferred in the majority of the choices, followed by a preference for mesh surgery in a quarter of all choice sets. However, these results represent the average preference of a sample of women and cannot be taken as the preference of each individual. In the medical decision-making context, information from the current study should be personalised to fit patient's unique circumstances. For patients to construct their own, individual preferences, they should be well informed about the existence and magnitude of the potential benefits and risks related to either anterior colporrhaphy or mesh surgery.

Sustainability of an enhanced recovery after surgery program (ERAS) in colonic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Between 2006 and 2008 the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program was implemented in colonic surgery in one-third of all hospitals in the Netherlands (n = 33). This resulted in enhanced recovery and a decrease in hospital length of stay (LOS) from a median of 9 days at baseline to 6 days at one-year follow-up. The present study assessed the sustainability of the ERAS program 3-5 years after its implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the 33 ERAS hospitals, 10 initially successful hospitals were selected, with success defined as a median LOS of 6 days or lower and protocol adherence rates above 70 %. In 2012 a retrospective audit of 30 consecutive patients was performed in each of these hospitals. Sustainability of the ERAS program was assessed on hospital level, using median hospital LOS, protocol adherence rates and time to functional recovery. Data were compared with the implementation phase data. RESULTS: Overall median LOS in the selected hospitals increased from 5.25 days (interquartile range [IQR] 4.75-6.00; min, 4.00-max, 6.00) to 6 days (IQR 5.00-7.00; min, 5.00-max, 8.00), but this change was not significant (p = 0.052). Time to functional recovery was equal in both phases: median 3.00 days (p = 0.26). Protocol adherence decreased from 75 to 67 % (p = 0.32). Especially adherence to postoperative care elements dropped considerably. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a slight decrease in protocol adherence, the ERAS program was sustained reasonably well in the 10 selected hospitals, although there was quite some variation between the hospitals.

Involving women in personalised decision-making on mode of delivery after caesarean section: the development and pilot testing of a patient decision aid.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a patient decision aid (PtDA) for mode of delivery after caesarean section that integrates personalised prediction of vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) with the elicitation of patient preferences and evidence-based information. DESIGN: A PtDA was developed and pilot tested using the International Patients Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) criteria. SETTING: Obstetric health care in the Netherlands. POPULATION: A multidisciplinary steering group, an expert panel, and 25 future users of the PtDA, i.e. women with a previous caesarean section. METHODS: The development consisted of a construction phase (definition of scope and purpose, and selection of content, framework, and format) and a pilot testing phase by interview. The process was supervised by a multidisciplinary steering group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Usability, clarity, and relevance. RESULTS: The construction phase resulted in a booklet including unbiased balanced information on mode of birth after caesarean section, a preference elicitation exercise, and tailored risk information, including a prediction model for successful VBAC. During pilot testing, visualisation of risks and clarity formed the main basis for revisions. Pilot testing showed the availability of tailored structured information to be the main factor involving women in decision-making. The PtDA meets 39 out of 50 IPDAS criteria (78%): 23 out of 23 criteria for content (100%) and 16 out of 20 criteria for the development process (80%). Criteria for effectiveness (n = 7) were not evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: An evidence-based PtDA was developed, with the probability of successful VBAC and the availability of structured information as key items. It is likely that the PtDA enhances the quality of decision-making on mode of birth after caesarean section.

Eliciting patients' preferences for epilepsy diagnostics: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing epilepsy is a lengthy and burdensome process for patients and their family. Although the need for a more patient-centered approach in clinical practice is widely acknowledged, empirical evidence regarding patient preferences for diagnostic modalities in epilepsy is missing. The objectives of this study were 1) to identify to what extent important attributes of diagnostic procedures in epilepsy affect preferences for a procedure, 2) to determine the relative importance of these attributes, and 3) to calculate overall utility scores for routine electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) recordings. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was performed to determine patients' preferences, which involved presentation of pairwise choice tasks regarding hypothetical scenarios. Scenarios varied along six attributes: "way of measuring brain activity", "duration", "freedom of movement", "travel time", "type of additional examination", and "chance of additional examination". Choice tasks were constructed using a statistically efficient design, and the questionnaire contained 15 unique unlabeled choice tasks. Mixed multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate patients' preferences. RESULTS: A total of 289 questionnaires were included in the analysis. McFadden's pseudo R(2) showed a model fit of 0.28, and all attributes were statistically significant. Heterogeneity in preferences was present for all attributes. "Freedom of movement" and "Chance of additional examination" were perceived as the most important attributes. Overall utility scores did not substantially differ between routine EEG and MEG. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the identified attributes are important in determining patients' preference for epilepsy diagnostics. It can be concluded that MEG is not necessarily more patient-friendly than a routine EEG in primary diagnostics and, regarding additional diagnostics, patients have a strong preference for long-term 24-h EEG over EEG after sleep deprivation. Furthermore, barring substantial heterogeneity within the parameters in mind, our study suggests that it is important to take individual preferences into account in medical decision-making.

The significant effect of endometriosis on physical, mental and social wellbeing: results from an international cross-sectional survey.

STUDY QUESTION: To what extent do the management of endometriosis and the symptoms that remain after treatment affect the quality of life in women with the disease? SUMMARY ANSWER: Many women with endometriosis had impaired quality of life and continued to suffer from endometriosis-associated symptoms even though their endometriosis has been managed in tertiary care centres. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The existing literature indicates that quality of life and work productivity is reduced in women with endometriosis. However, most studies have small sample sizes, are treatment related or examine newly diagnosed patients only. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey among 931 women with endometriosis treated in 12 tertiary care centres in 10 countries. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Women diagnosed with endometriosis who had at least one contact related to endometriosis-associated symptoms during 2008 with a participating centre were enrolled into the study. The study investigated the effect of endometriosis on education, work and social wellbeing, endometriosis-associated symptoms and health-related quality of life, by using questions obtained from the World Endometriosis Research Foundation (WERF) GSWH instrument (designed and validated for the WERF Global Study on Women's Health) and the Short Form 36 version 2 (SF-36v2). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of 3216 women invited to participate in the study, 1450 (45%) provided informed consent and out of these, 931 (931/3216 = 29%) returned the questionnaires. Endometriosis had affected work in 51% of the women and affected relationships in 50% of the women at some time during their life. Dysmenorrhoea was reported by 59%, dyspareunia by 56% and chronic pelvic pain by 60% of women. Quality of life was decreased in all eight dimensions of the SF-36v2 compared with norm-based scores from a general US population (all P < 0.01). Multivariate regression analysis showed that number of co-morbidities, chronic pain and dyspareunia had an independent negative effect on both the physical and mental component of the SF-36v2. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The fact that women were enrolled in tertiary care centres could lead to a possible over-representation of women with moderate-to-severe endometriosis, because the participating centres typically treat more complex and referred cases of endometriosis. The response rate was relatively low. Since there was no Institute Review Board approval to do a non-responder investigation on basic characteristics, some uncertainty remains regarding the representativeness of the investigated population. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This international multicentre survey represents a large group of women with endometriosis, in all phases of the disease, which increases the generalizability of the data. Women still suffer from frequent symptoms, despite tertiary care management, in particular chronic pain and dyspareunia. As a result their quality of life is significantly decreased. A patient-centred approach with extensive collaboration across disciplines, such as pain specialists, psychologists, sexologists and social workers, may be a valuable strategy to improve the long-term care of women with endometriosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The WERF EndoCost study is funded by the World Endometriosis Research Foundation (WERF) through grants received from Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Takeda Italia Farmaceutici SpA, Pfizer Ltd and the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. The sponsors did not have a role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review or approval of the manuscript. L.H. is the chief executive and T.D. was a board member of WERF at the time of funding. T.D. holds the Merck-Serono Chair in Reproductive Medicine and Surgery, and the Ferring Chair in Reproductive Medicine at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium and has served as consultant/research collaborator for Merck-Serono, Schering-Plough, Astellas and Arresto.

Pain relief and quality-of-life improvement after spinal cord stimulation in painful diabetic polyneuropathy: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Painful diabetic polyneuropathy (PDP) is associated with high pain scores and is difficult to treat. Therefore, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been suggested as second-line treatment. In this study, the feasibility and efficacy of SCS in PDP were investigated, as well as the predictive value of clinical sensory testing for the treatment outcome. METHODS: Fifteen patients with intractable PDP in the lower limbs were recruited. During lead implantation, the feasibility of achieving adequate paraesthesia coverage using one stimulation lead was investigated. If trial stimulation was successful, a definitive neurostimulator was implanted. Pain intensity was scored using an 11-point numeric rating scale and patients' global impression of change scale. Additionally, neuropathic pain characteristics, quality of life, sleep quality and mood were assessed. The predictive value of clinical sensory testing for the treatment outcome was analysed. RESULTS: Adequate paraesthesia coverage was achieved in 14 out of 15 patients. Clinically relevant pain relief was present in 11 patients after trial stimulation and 10 patients at 12 months. The quality of life was significantly increased at 2 weeks and 3 months in patients with successful SCS treatment. Several neuropathic pain characteristics and quality of sleep were improved at 2 weeks and 12 months. Preoperative clinical sensory testing did not differentiate between treatment responders from non-responders. CONCLUSIONS: SCS seems to be an efficacious and feasible treatment for intractable PDP. In this exploratory study, it was not possible to predict the treatment outcome using clinical sensory testing. These results justify performing a randomized clinical trial.

[The costs and benefits of an integrated approach to dementia]. / De kosten en opbrengsten van een geïntegreerde aanpak bij dementie.

BACKGROUND: An integrated approach to dementia is generally recommended because no one discipline is adequately equipped it deal with the complex psychic, physical and social problems that are inherent in dementia. A multidisciplinary approach, however, leads inevitably to higher costs. It is not known what the cost/benefit ratio will be. AIM: To describe our research into the costs and benefits of an integrated approach to dementia involving the use of a diagnostic research centre for psycho-geriatrics and thereafter to compare our findings with the results of other studies of the costs and benefits of an integrated approach. METHOD: We performed a prospective and randomised efficiency study and we compared our findings with the results of other studies of the costs and benefits of an integrated approach. We reviewed recent literature. RESULTS: The DRC-PG was more effective than normal care as far as the patients' quality of life was concerned, but was not more expensive. It can therefore be regarded as a cost-effective facility for ambulatory patients with dementia. Three other studies provided additional empirical evidence of the success of a similar integrated approach in various sectors involved in the care of patients with dementia. CONCLUSION: An integrated approach with regard to the diagnosis, treatment and management of dementia produces favourable results. More research is needed into the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of integrated care programmes. This should result in improvements in the care and treatment of patients with dementia.