46 research outputs found

    A tool to improve pre-selection for deep brain stimulation in patients with Parkinson’s disease

    Get PDF
    Determining the eligibility of patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) for deep brain stimulation (DBS) can be challenging for general (non-specialised) neurologists. We evaluated the use of an online screening tool (Stimulus) that aims to support appropriate referral to a specialised centre for the further evaluation of DBS. Implementation of the tool took place via an ongoing European multicentre educational programme, currently completed in 15 DBS centres with 208 referring neurologists. Use of the tool in daily practice was monitored via an online data capture programme. Selection decisions of patients referred with the assistance of the Stimulus tool were compared to those of patients outside the screening programme. Three years after the start of the programme, 3,128 patient profiles had been entered. The intention for referral was made for 802 patients and referral intentions were largely in accordance with the tool recommendations. Follow-up at 6 months showed that actual referral took place in only 28%, predominantly due to patients’ reluctance to undergo brain surgery. In patients screened with the tool and referred to a DBS centre, the acceptance rate was 77%, significantly higher than that of the unscreened population (48%). The tool showed a sensitivity of 99% and a specificity of 12% with a positive and negative predictive value of 79 and 75%, respectively. The Stimulus tool is useful in assisting general neurologists to identify appropriate candidates for DBS consideration. The principal reason for not referring potentially eligible patients is their reluctance to undergo brain surgery

    Appropriate referral and selection of patients with chronic pain for spinal cord stimulation: European consensus recommendations and e-health tool

    Get PDF
    Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an established treatment for chronic neuropathic, neuropathic-like and ischaemic pain. However, the heterogeneity of patients in daily clinical practice makes it often challenging to determine which patients are eligible for this treatment, resulting in undesirable practice variations. This study aimed to establish patient-specific recommendations for referral and selection of SCS in chronic pain. Methods: A multidisciplinary European panel used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RUAM) to assess the appropriateness of (referral for) SCS for 386 clinical scenarios in four pain areas: chronic low back pain and/or leg pain, complex regional pain syndrome, neuropathic pain syndromes and ischaemic pain syndromes. In addition, the panel identified a set of psychosocial factors that are relevant to the decision for SCS treatment. Results: Appropriateness of SCS was strongly determined by the neuropathic or neuropathic-like pain component, location and spread of pain, anatomic abnormalities and previous response to therapies targeting pain processing (e.g. nerve block). Psychosocial factors considered relevant for SCS selection were as follows: lack of engagement, dysfunctional coping, unrealistic expectations, inadequate daily activity level, problematic social support, secondary gain, psychological distress and unwillingness to reduce high-dose opioids. An educational e-health tool was developed that combines clinical and psychosocial factors into an advice on referral/selection for SCS. Conclusions: The RUAM was useful to establish a consensus on patient-specific criteria for referral/selection for SCS in chronic pain. The e-health tool may help physicians learn to apply an integrated approach of clinical and psychosocial factors. Significance: Determining the eligibility of SCS in patients with chronic pain requires careful consideration of a variety of clinical and psychosocial factors. Using a systematic approach to combine evidence from clinical studies and expert opinion, a multidisciplinary European expert panel developed detailed recommendations to support appropriate referral and selection for SCS in chronic pain. These recommendations are available as an educational e-health tool (https://www.scstool.org/)

    Databases as policy instruments. About extending networks as evidence-based policy

    Get PDF
    Background. This article seeks to identify the role of databases in health policy. Access to information and communication technologies has changed traditional relationships between the state and professionals, creating new systems of surveillance and control. As a result, databases may have a profound effect on controlling clinical practice. Methods. We conducted three case studies to reconstruct the development and use of databases as policy instruments. Each database was intended to be employed to control the use of one particular pharmaceutical in the Netherlands (growth hormone, antiretroviral drugs for HIV and Taxol, respectively). We studied the archives of th

    The appropriate management of persisting pain after spine surgery: a European panel study with recommendations based on the RAND/UCLA method

    Get PDF
    Purpose: Management of patients with persisting pain after spine surgery (PPSS) shows significant variability, and there is limited evidence from clinical studies to support treatment choice in daily practice. This study aimed to develop patient-specific recommendations on the management of PPSS. Methods: Using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method (RUAM), an international panel of 6 neurosurgeons, 6 pain specialists, and 6 orthopaedic surgeons assessed the appropriateness of 4 treatment options (conservative, minimally invasive, neurostimulation, and re-operation) for 210 clinical scenarios. These scenarios were unique combinations of patient characteristics considered relevant to treatment choice. Appropriateness had to be expressed on a 9-point scale (1 = extremely inappropriate, 9 = extremely appropriate). A treatment was considered appropriate if the median score was ≄ 7 in the absence of disagreement (≄ 1/3 of ratings in each of the opposite sections 1–3 and 7–9). Results: Appropriateness outcomes showed clear and specific patterns. In 48% of the scenarios, exclusively one of the 4 treatments was appropriate. Conservative treatment was usually considered appropriate for patients without clear anatomic abnormalities and for those with new pain differing from the original symptoms. Neurostimulation was considered appropriate in the case of (predominant) neuropathic leg pain in the absence of conditions that may require surgical intervention. Re-operation could be considered for patients with recurrent disc, spinal/foraminal stenosis, or spinal instability. Conclusions: Using the RUAM, an international multidisciplinary panel established criteria for appropriate treatment choice in patients with PPSS. These may be helpful to educate physicians and to improve consistency and quality of care. Graphical abstract: These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. [Figure not available: see fulltext.

    Changing Therapeutic Regimens in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Clinical and Economic Considerations

    No full text
    About one-quarter of men aged 50 years and older experience voiding problems due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Until about 10 years ago, surgery (particularly transurethral resection of the prostate) was the only effective treatment for symptomatic BPH. Over the last decade, several new treatments have been introduced. These include different types of medication (alpha-blockers and finasteride), thermotherapy, laser prostatectomy, needle ablation and vaporisation methods. The diffusion of these less invasive treatment modalities has resulted not only in a decrease in the age-adjusted surgery rates, but also in an increase of the total number of men treated for BPH. A large number of studies on clinical benefits and risks reveal that the conventional types of surgery remain the most effective treatments, whereas new interventional therapies require a shorter hospital stay and result in fewer short term complications. The efficacy of medication is lower than that of interventional treatments. Adverse effects include dizziness and orthostatic hypotension (alpha-blockers) and decreased sexual function (finasteride), but are generally mild. There is some evidence that medication and minimally invasive treatments may preclude eventual surgical treatment, but the precise effect is difficult to estimate because of differences in the study populations and the relatively short study periods. As a result of the dynamic nature of BPH treatment and the lack of long term data, the cost effects of the introduction of the various new treatments are also difficult to assess. Given the aging of the population and the growing percentage of patients with BPH for whom any type of treatment can be considered, a considerable increase of total costs can be expected. Long term prospective studies are necessary to gain insight into the most cost-effective treatment for different patient groups.Alpha adrenoceptor antagonists, Antiandrogens, Benign prostatic hyperplasia, Cost analysis, Finasteride, Pharmacoeconomics, Surgery

    The appropriate management of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a single institute evaluation using the VCF Monitor

    No full text
    Osteoporosis-related vertebral compression fractures (OVCF) are commonly seen in clinical practice. Treatment choice is often challenging due to heterogeneity of the patient population. A European multidisciplinary expert panel developed patient-specific recommendations for treatment choice that were embedded in an online evaluation tool (VCF Monitor).Purpose: To evaluate the appropriateness of treatment choice in patients with OVCF in a German hospital.Patients and methods: Prospective observational study in 190 patients with OCVF (2013-2015). Using the VCF Monitor, treatment choices were compared with the recommendations of the European expert panel.Results: Treatment choices included balloon kyphoplasty (61%), non-surgical management (36%) and other surgical procedures (3%). Compared to the panel recommendations, 70% of treatment choices were appropriate, 24% uncertain, and 3% inappropriate. Less appropriate choices were partly due to patient preferences.Conclusions: The VCF Monitor proved to be a helpful tool for quality assurance in the management of OVCF
    corecore