Long-term MRA follow-up after coiling of intracranial aneurysms: impact on mood and anxiety

Magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) screening for recurrence of a coiled intracranial aneurysm and formation of new aneurysms long-term after coiling may induce anxiety and depression. In coiled patients, we evaluated effects on mood and level of anxiety from long-term follow-up MRA in comparison to general population norms. Of 162 patients participating in a long-term (> 4.5 years) MRA follow-up after coiling, 120 completed the EQ-5D questionnaire, a visual analog health scale and a self-developed screening related questionnaire at the time of MRA. Three months later, the same questionnaires were completed by 100 of these 120 patients. Results were compared to general population norms adjusted for gender and age. Any problem with anxiety or depression was reported in 56 of 120 patients (47%; 95%CI38a dagger"56%) at baseline and 42 of 100 patients (42%; 95%CI32a dagger"52%) at 3 months, equally for screen-positives and -negatives. Compared to the reference population, participants scored 38% (95%CI9a dagger"67%) and 27% (95%CI4a dagger"50%) more often any problem with anxiety or depression. Three months after screening, 21% (20 of 92) of screen-negatives and 13% (one of eight) of screen-positives reported to be less afraid of subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) compared to before screening. One of eight screen-positives reported increased fear of SAH. Patients with coiled intracranial aneurysms participating in long-term MRA screening reported significantly more often to be anxious or depressed than a reference group. Screening did not significantly increase anxiety or depression temporarily. However, subjectively, patients did report an increase in anxiety caused by screening, which decreased after 3 months

From evidence to best practice in the management of fractures of the distal radius in adults: working towards a research agenda

BACKGROUND: Fracture of the distal radius is a common clinical problem, particularly in older white women with osteoporosis. We report our work towards evidence-based and patient-centred care for adults with these injuries. METHODS: We developed a systematic programme of research that built on our systematic review of the evidence of effectiveness of treatment interventions for these fractures. We devised schemata showing 'typical' care pathways and identified over 100 patient management questions. These depicted the more important decisions taken when progressing along each care pathway. We compiled a comprehensive document summarising the evidence available for each decision point from our reviews of randomised trials of treatment interventions. Using these documents, we undertook a formal and structured consultation process involving key players, including a patient representative, to obtain their views on the available evidence and to establish a research agenda. The resulting feedback was then processed and interpreted, using systematic methods. RESULTS: Some evidence from 114 randomised trials was available for 31 of the 117 patient management questions. However, there was sufficient evidence to base some conclusions of effectiveness for particular interventions in only five of these. Though only 60% of those approached responded, the responses received from the consultation group were often comprehensive and provided important insights into treatment practice and policy. There was a clear acceptance of the aims of the project and, aside from some suggestions for the more explicit inclusion of secondary prevention and management of complications, of the care pathways scheme. Though some respondents stressed that randomised trials were not always appropriate, there was no direct overall criticism of the evidence document and underlying processes. We were able to identify important core themes that underpin management decisions and research from the feedback of the consultation exercise. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this project is an important advance towards evidence-based and patient-centred management of adults with distal radial fractures. It exposes the serious deficiency in the available evidence but also provides a template for further action. As well as being a valuable basis for viewing and informing current practice, the insights gained from this project should inform a future research agenda

The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) can measure the impairment, activity limitations and participation restriction constructs from the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)

Background The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) model of the consequences of disease identifies three health outcomes, impairment, activity limitations and participation restrictions. However, few orthopaedic health outcome measures were developed with reference to the ICF. This study examined the ability of a valid and frequently used measure of upper limb function, namely the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (DASH), to operationalise the ICF. Methods Twenty-four judges used the method of Discriminant Content Validation to allocate the 38 items of the DASH to the theoretical definition of one or more ICF outcome. One-sample t-tests classified each item as measuring, impairment, activity limitations, participation restrictions, or a combination thereof. Results The DASH contains items able to measure each of the three ICF outcomes with discriminant validity. The DASH contains five pure impairment items, 19 pure activity limitations items and three participation restriction items. In addition, seven items measured both activity limitations and participation restrictions. Conclusions The DASH can measure the three health outcomes identified by the ICF. Consequently the DASH could be used to examine the impact of trauma and subsequent interventions on each health outcome in the absence of measurement confound