Discrete Choice Experiment on a Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scoring System for Temporomandibular Joints in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Objective To determine the relative importance weights of items and grades of a newly developed additive outcome measure called the juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scoring system for the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) (JAMRIS-TMJ). Methods An adaptive partial-profile, discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey using the 1000Minds platform was independently completed by members of an expert group consisting of radiologists and non-radiologist clinicians to determine the group-averaged relative weights for the JAMRIS-TMJ. Subsequently, an image-based vignette ranking exercise was done, during which experts individually rank ordered 14 patient vignettes for disease severity while blinded to the weights and unrestricted to JAMRIS-TMJ assessment criteria. Validity of the weighted JAMRIS-TMJ was tested by comparing the consensus-graded, DCE-weighted JAMRIS-TMJ score of the vignettes with their unrestricted image-based ranks provided by the experts. Results Nineteen experts completed the DCE survey, and 21 completed the vignette ranking exercise. Synovial thickening and joint enhancement showed higher weights per raw score compared to bone marrow items and effusion in the inflammatory domain, while erosions and condylar flattening showed nonlinear and higher weights compared to disk abnormalities in the damage domain. The weighted JAMRIS-TMJ score of the vignettes correlated highly with the ranks from the unrestricted comparison method, with median Spearman's ρ of 0.92 (interquartile range [IQR] 0.87–0.95) for the inflammation and 0.93 (IQR 0.90–0.94) for the damage domain. Conclusion A DCE survey was used to quantify the importance weights of the items and grades of the JAMRIS-TMJ. The weighted score showed high convergent validity with an unrestricted, holistic vignette ranking method

Heterogeneity of management practices surrounding operable gallbladder cancer – results of the OMEGA-S international HPB surgical survey

Background: Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is an aggressive, uncommon malignancy, with variation in operative approaches adopted across centres and few large-scale studies to guide practice. We aimed to identify the extent of heterogeneity in GBC internationally to better inform the need for future multicentre studies. Methods: A 34-question online survey was disseminated to members of the European-African Hepatopancreatobiliary Association (EAHPBA), American Hepatopancreatobiliary Association (AHPBA) and Asia-Pacific Hepatopancreatobiliary Association (A-PHPBA) regarding practices around diagnostic workup, operative approach, utilization of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies and surveillance strategies. Results: Two hundred and three surgeons responded from 51 countries. High liver resection volume units (>50 resections/year) organised HPB multidisciplinary team discussion of GBCs more commonly than those with low volumes (p < 0.0001). Management practices exhibited areas of heterogeneity, particularly around operative extent. Contrary to consensus guidelines, anatomical liver resections were favoured over non-anatomical resections for T3 tumours and above, lymphadenectomy extent was lower than recommended, and a minority of respondents still routinely excised the common bile duct or port sites. Conclusion: Our findings suggest some similarities in the management of GBC internationally, but also specific areas of practice which differed from published guidelines. Transcontinental collaborative studies on GBC are necessary to establish evidence-based practice to minimise variation and optimise outcomes