Inter-method reliability of the modified Rankin Scale in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage

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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00415-021-10880-4

Inter-method reliability of the modified Rankin Scale in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage

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.Scientific Assessment and Innovation in Neurosurgical Treatment Strategie

Not as transient: patients with transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke experience cognitive and communication problems; an exploratory study

Background: Patients with transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke generally receive, besides secondary prevention, no regular follow up care after discharge directly home from the Emergency Room or TIA outpatient clinic; because it is believed that they will experience no consequences. Objectives: To explore whether the TIA and minor stroke patients have persistent problems due to the event. Methods: This study has a cross-sectional, comparative non-randomized, exploratory design. Patients with TIA or minor stroke, not requiring hospital admission, and a control group of stroke patients, recently discharged home, were selected and interviewed with a questionnaire by telephone or home visit, between one and eight months after the event. Patients with angina pectoris (AP) were recruited as a second control group. Results: Data showed that 51% of the TIA and minor stroke patients and 71% of the stroke patients experienced five or more problems, as opposed to 32% of patients with AP. Between 39 and 49% of the TIA, minor stroke and the stroke patients reported cognitive and communicative difficulties. Moreover, the TIA and minor stroke patients had more cognitive deficits (n = 27, 49%) and communicative limitations (n = 23, 42%) than the AP group (n = 7, 10% and n = 4, 6%, respectively). Conclusion: About half of the TIA and minor stroke patients experienced problems regarding cognition and communication, which were specific to the event. General practitioners should be aware of these potential problems and monitor patients regularly. Future research should focus on prognostic indicators to identify patients at risk

Wakkere hersenchirurgie voor epilepsie: Preventie van taalstoornissen?

Tijdens een wakkere hersenoperatie worden hersengebieden in kaart gebracht die betrokken zijn bij taalfuncties. In een onderzoek waarvan hier verslag wordt gedaan, werden van patiënten die in aanmerking kwamen voor epilepsiechirurgie de expressieve en receptieve taalfunctie en de aanvalsfrequentie pre- en postoperatief onderzocht. De resultaten tonen dat deze operatietechniek leidt tot een hoge kans op complete aanvalsvrijheid zonder verslechtering van taalfunctie

Endovascular treatment and neurosurgical clipping in subarachnoid hemorrhage: a systematic review of economic evaluations

INTRODUCTION: There are two treatment modalities for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: endovascular treatment and neurosurgical clipping. Results of economic evaluations are needed to gain insight into the relationship between clinical effectiveness and costs of these treatment modalities. This important information can inform both clinical decision-making processes and policymakers in facilitating Value-Based Healthcare. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, EBSCO, and Web of Science) were searched for studies published until October 2020 that had performed economic evaluations in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage patients by comparing endovascular treatment with neurosurgical clipping. The quality of reporting and methodology of these evaluations was assessed using the associated instruments (i.e. CHEERS statement and CHEC-list, respectively). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of six studies met the inclusion criteria. All included studies reported both effects and costs, however five did not relate effects to costs. Only one study related effects directly to costs, thus conducted a full economic evaluation. The reporting quality scored 81% and the methodological quality scored 30%. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of published cost-effectiveness studies on the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage is poor. Six studies reported both outcomes and costs, however only one study performed a full economic evaluation comparing endovascular treatment to neurosurgical clipping. Although the reporting quality was sufficient, the methodological quality was poor. Further research that relates health-related quality of life measures to costs of endovascular treatment and neurosurgical clipping is required-specifically focusing on both reporting and methodological quality. Different subgroup analyses and modeling could also enhance the findings

Protocol for intraoperative assessment of the human cerebrovascular glycocalyx

INTRODUCTION: Adequate functioning of the blood–brain barrier (BBB) is important for brain homoeostasis and normal neuronal function. Disruption of the BBB has been described in several neurological diseases. Recent reports suggest that an increased permeability of the BBB also contributes to increased seizure susceptibility in patients with epilepsy. The endothelial glycocalyx is coating the luminal side of the endothelium and can be considered as the first barrier of the BBB. We hypothesise that an altered glycocalyx thickness plays a role in the aetiology of temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), the most common type of epilepsy. Here, we propose a protocol that allows intraoperative assessment of the cerebrovascular glycocalyx thickness in patients with TLE and assess whether its thickness is decreased in patients with TLE when compared with controls. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol is designed as a prospective observational case–control study in patients who undergo resective brain surgery as treatment for TLE. Control subjects are patients without a history of epileptic seizures, who undergo a craniotomy or burr hole surgery for other indications. Intraoperative glycocalyx thickness measurements of sublingual, cortical and hippocampal microcirculation are performed by video microscopy using sidestream dark-field imaging. Demographic details, seizure characteristics, epilepsy risk factors, intraoperative haemodynamic parameters and histopathological evaluation are additionally recorded. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol has been ethically approved by the local medical ethical committee (ID: NL51594.068.14) and complies with the Declaration of Helsinki and principles of Good Clinical Practice. Informed consent is obtained before study enrolment and only coded data will be stored in a secured database, enabling an audit trail. Results will be submitted to international peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR5568

The SOS-SAH questionnaire in clinical practice: a multi-method evaluation study

Abstract Background In patients with mild disabilities after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH), invisible symptoms might be easily overlooked during consultations in the outpatient clinic. We hypothesize that the Questionnaire for the Screening of Symptoms in aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (SOS-SAH), a disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure, might aid in screening for symptoms after aSAH. The objective of this explorative study is to evaluate the perceived impact of using the SOS-SAH in daily clinical practice for patients after aSAH, as well as to explore potential barriers to further implementation. Methods This multi-method study consists of a quantitative and a qualitative component. To evaluate differences in quality of care, a patient experience survey was sent to patients receiving usual care and to patients who received the SOS-SAH. A multiple linear regression model was applied, with the intervention group and case mix adjusters as independent variables. We described differences in the number of symptoms discussed between patients receiving usual care and those receiving care post-implementation. Following implementation, 16 patients and 6 healthcare professionals were interviewed about their perceptions concerning the impact of and barriers to using the SOS-SAH. A thematic analysis was performed to identify the main themes. Results The survey did not reveal any differences between the usual-care group and the post-implementation group on the scales of the patient experience survey. After implementation of the SOS-SAH, the number of symptoms discussed during consultation did not increase. The interviews suggest that the SOS-SAH may improve the preparation of patients by providing them with greater insight into their complaints and by raising issues for the consultation. It could also enhance the structure and efficiency of consultation, in addition to improving communication about issues that matter to patients. All patients and healthcare professionals recommended continuing the use of the SOS-SAH in daily practice. Conclusions Although no quantitative improvements were found in patient experience and symptoms discussed during consultation, implementation of the SOS-SAH could aid in screening for symptoms in patients after aSAH, and it might have a positive influence on patient preparation, while helping to structure consultations between patients and healthcare professionals