Reliability of sickness certificates in detecting potential sick leave reduction by modifying working conditions: a clinical epidemiology study

BACKGROUND: Medical sickness certificates are generally the main source for information when scrutinizing the need for aimed intervention strategies to avoid or reduce the individual and community side effects of sick leave. This study explored the value of medical sickness certificates related to daily work in Norwegian National Insurance Offices to identify sick-listed persons, where modified working conditions might reduce the ongoing sick leave. METHODS: The potential for reducing the ongoing sick leave by modifying working conditions was individually assessed on routine sickness certificates in 999 consecutive sick leave episodes by four Norwegian National Insurance collaborators, two with and two without formal medical competence. The study took place in Northern Norway in 1997 and 1998. Agreement analysed with differences against mean, kappa, and proportional-agreement analysis within and between groups of assessors was used in the judgement. Agreements between the assessors and the self-assessment of sick-listed subjects were additionally analysed in 159 sick-leave episodes. RESULTS: Both sick-listed subjects and National Insurance collaborators anticipated a potential reduction in sick leave in 20–30% of cases, and in another 20% the potential was assessed as possible. The chance corrected agreements, however, were poor (k < 0.20) within and between groups of National Insurance collaborators. The agreement between National Insurance collaborators and the sick-listed subjects was no better than chance. Neither extended medical information nor formal medical competence increased agreement in cases where modified working conditions might have reduced sick leave. CONCLUSION: Information in medical sickness certificates proved ineffective in detecting cases where modified working conditions may reduce sick leave, and focusing on medical certificates may prevent identification of needed interventions. Strategies on how to communicate directly with sick-listed subjects would enable social authorities to exploit more of the sick leave reduction potential by modifying the working conditions than strategies on improving medical information

Budesonide/formoterol and formoterol provide similar rapid relief in patients with acute asthma showing refractoriness to salbutamol

BACKGROUND: To compare the efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort(®)) with formoterol (Oxis(®)) in the treatment of patients with acute asthma who showed evidence of refractoriness to short-acting β(2)-agonist therapy. METHODS: In a 3 hour, randomized, double-blind study, a total of 115 patients with acute asthma (mean FEV(1 )40% of predicted normal) and a refractory response to salbutamol (mean reversibility 2% of predicted normal after inhalation of 400 μg), were randomized to receive either budesonide/formoterol (320/9 μg, 2 inhalations at t = -5 minutes and 2 inhalations at 0 minutes [total dose 1280/36 μg]) or formoterol (9 μg, 2 inhalations at t = -5 minutes and 2 inhalations at 0 minutes [total dose 36 μg]). The primary efficacy variable was the average FEV(1 )from the first intake of study medication to the measurement at 90 minutes. Secondary endpoints included changes in FEV(1 )at other timepoints and change in respiratory rate at 180 minutes. Treatment success, treatment failure and patient assessment of the effectiveness of the study medication were also measured. RESULTS: FEV(1 )increased after administration of the study medication in both treatment groups. No statistically significant difference between the treatment groups was apparent for the primary outcome variable, or for any of the other efficacy endpoints. There were no statistically significant between-group differences for treatment success, treatment failure or patient assessment of medication effectiveness. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Budesonide/formoterol and formoterol provided similarly rapid relief of acute bronchoconstriction in patients with asthma who showed evidence of refractoriness to a short-acting β(2)-agonist

Quality of life data as prognostic indicators of survival in cancer patients: an overview of the literature from 1982 to 2008

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Health-related quality of life and survival are two important outcome measures in cancer research and practice. The aim of this paper is to examine the relationship between quality of life data and survival time in cancer patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A review was undertaken of all the full publications in the English language biomedical journals between 1982 and 2008. The search was limited to cancer, and included the combination of keywords 'quality of life', 'patient reported-outcomes' 'prognostic', 'predictor', 'predictive' and 'survival' that appeared in the titles of the publications. In addition, each study was examined to ensure that it used multivariate analysis. Purely psychological studies were excluded. A manual search was also performed to include additional papers of potential interest.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 451 citations were identified in this rapid and systematic review of the literature. Of these, 104 citations on the relationship between quality of life and survival were found to be relevant and were further examined. The findings are summarized under different headings: heterogeneous samples of cancer patients, lung cancer, breast cancer, gastro-oesophageal cancers, colorectal cancer, head and neck cancer, melanoma and other cancers. With few exceptions, the findings showed that quality of life data or some aspects of quality of life measures were significant independent predictors of survival duration. Global quality of life, functioning domains and symptom scores - such as appetite loss, fatigue and pain - were the most important indicators, individually or in combination, for predicting survival times in cancer patients after adjusting for one or more demographic and known clinical prognostic factors.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This review provides evidence for a positive relationship between quality of life data or some quality of life measures and the survival duration of cancer patients. Pre-treatment (baseline) quality of life data appeared to provide the most reliable information for helping clinicians to establish prognostic criteria for treating their cancer patients. It is recommended that future studies should use valid instruments, apply sound methodological approaches and adequate multivariate statistical analyses adjusted for socio-demographic characteristics and known clinical prognostic factors with a satisfactory validation strategy. This strategy is likely to yield more accurate and specific quality of life-related prognostic variables for specific cancers.</p