Outcomes that matter most to burn patients:A national multicentre survey study in the Netherlands

Background: The use of patient-reported outcomes to improve burn care increases. Little is known on burn patients’ views on what outcomes are most important, and about preferences regarding online Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Therefore, this study assessed what outcomes matter most to patients, and gained insights into patient preferences towards the use of online PROMs. Methods: Adult patients (≥18 years old), 3–36 months after injury completed a survey measuring importance of outcomes, separately for three time periods: during admission, short-term (&lt;6 months) and long-term (6–24 months) after burn injury. Both open and closed-ended questions were used. Furthermore, preferences regarding the use of patient-reported outcome measures in burn care were queried. Results: A total of 140 patients were included (response rate: 27%). ‘Not having pain’ and ‘good wound healing’ were identified as very important outcomes. Also, ‘physical functioning at pre-injury level’, ‘being independent’ and ‘taking care of yourself’ were considered very important outcomes. The top-ten of most important outcomes largely overlapped in all three time periods. Most patients (84%) had no problems with online questionnaires, and many (67%) indicated that it should take up to 15 minutes. Patients’ opinions differed widely on the preferred frequency of follow-up. Conclusions: Not having pain and good wound healing were considered very important during the whole recovery of burns; in addition, physical functioning at pre-injury level, being independent, and taking care of yourself were deemed very important in the short and long-term. These outcomes are recommended to be used in burn care and research, although careful selection of outcomes remains crucial as patients prefer online questionnaires up to 15 minutes.</p

Long-term cardiometabolic disease risk in women with PCOS:a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is associated with cardiometabolic disease, but recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses of longitudinal studies that quantify these associations are lacking. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: Is PCOS a risk factor for cardiometabolic disease? SEARCH METHODS: We searched from inception to September 2019 in MEDLINE and EMBASE using controlled terms (e.g. MESH) and text words for PCOS and cardiometabolic outcomes, including cardiovascular disease (CVD), stroke, myocardial infarction, hypertension (HT), type 2 diabetes (T2D), metabolic syndrome and dyslipidaemia. Cohort studies and case-control studies comparing the prevalence of T2D, HT, fatal or non-fatal CVD and/or lipid concentrations of total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglycerides (TGs) between women with and without PCOS of ≥18 years of age were eligible for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Studies were eligible regardless of the degree to which they adjusted for confounders including obesity. Articles had to be written in English, German or Dutch. Intervention studies, animal studies, conference abstracts, studies with a follow-up duration less than 3 years and studies with less than 10 PCOS cases were excluded. Study selection, quality assessment (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) and data extraction were performed by two independent researchers. OUTCOMES: Of the 5971 identified records, 23 cohort studies were included in the current systematic review. Women with PCOS had increased risks of HT (risk ratio (RR): 1.75, 95% CI 1.42 to 2.15), T2D (RR: 3.00, 95% CI 2.56 to 3.51), a higher serum concentration of TC (mean difference (MD): 7.14 95% CI 1.58 to 12.70 mg/dl), a lower serum concentration of HDL-C (MD: -2.45 95% CI -4.51 to -0.38 mg/dl) and increased risks of non-fatal cerebrovascular disease events (RR: 1.41, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.94) compared to women without PCOS. No differences were found for LDL-C (MD: 3.32 95% CI -4.11 to 10.75 mg/dl), TG (MD 18.53 95% CI -0.58 to 37.64 mg/dl) or coronary disease events (RR: 1.78, 95% CI 0.99 to 3.23). No meta-analyses could be performed for fatal CVD events due to the paucity of mortality data. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: Women with PCOS are at increased risk of cardiometabolic disease. This review quantifies this risk, which is important for clinicians to inform patients and to take into account in the cardiovascular risk assessment of women with PCOS. Future clinical trials are needed to assess the ability of cardiometabolic screening and management in women with PCOS to reduce future CVD morbidity

Development of a value-based healthcare burns core set for adult burn care

Background: Value-based healthcare (VBHC) is increasingly implemented in healthcare worldwide. Transparent measurement of the outcomes most important and relevant to patients is essential in VBHC, which is supported by a core set of most important quality indicators and outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a VBHC-burns core set for adult burn patients. Methods: A three-round modified national Delphi study, including 44 outcomes and 24 quality indicators, was conducted to reach consensus among Dutch patients, burn care professionals and researchers. Items were rated on a nine-point Likert scale and selected if ≥ 70% in each group considered an item ‘important’. Subsequently, instruments quantifying selected outcomes were identified based on a literature review and were chosen in a consensus meeting using recommendations from the Dutch consensus-based standard set and the Dutch Centre of Expertise on Health Disparities. Time assessment points were chosen to reflect the burn care and patient recovery process. Finally, the initial core set was evaluated in practice, leading to the adapted VBHC-burns core set. Results: Twenty-seven patients, 63 burn care professionals and 23 researchers participated. Ten outcomes and four quality indicators were selected in the Delphi study, including the outcomes pain, wound healing, physical activity, self-care, independence, return to work, depression, itching, scar flexibility and return to school. Quality indicators included shared decision-making (SDM), the number of patients receiving aftercare, determination of burn depth, and assessment of active range of motion. After evaluation of its use in clinical practice, the core set included all items except SDM, which are assessed by 9 patient-reported outcome instruments or measured in clinical care. Assessment time points included are at discharge, 2 weeks, 3 months, 12 months after discharge and annually afterwards. Conclusion: A VBHC-burns core set was developed, consisting of outcomes and quality indicators that are important to burn patients and burn care professionals. The VBHC-burns core set is now systemically monitored and analysed in Dutch burn care to improve care and patient relevant outcomes. As improving burn care and patient relevant outcomes is important worldwide, the developed VBHC-burns core set could be inspiring for other countries.</p

Outcomes that matter most to burn patients:A national multicentre survey study in the Netherlands

Background: The use of patient-reported outcomes to improve burn care increases. Little is known on burn patients’ views on what outcomes are most important, and about preferences regarding online Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Therefore, this study assessed what outcomes matter most to patients, and gained insights into patient preferences towards the use of online PROMs. Methods: Adult patients (≥18 years old), 3–36 months after injury completed a survey measuring importance of outcomes, separately for three time periods: during admission, short-term (&lt;6 months) and long-term (6–24 months) after burn injury. Both open and closed-ended questions were used. Furthermore, preferences regarding the use of patient-reported outcome measures in burn care were queried. Results: A total of 140 patients were included (response rate: 27%). ‘Not having pain’ and ‘good wound healing’ were identified as very important outcomes. Also, ‘physical functioning at pre-injury level’, ‘being independent’ and ‘taking care of yourself’ were considered very important outcomes. The top-ten of most important outcomes largely overlapped in all three time periods. Most patients (84%) had no problems with online questionnaires, and many (67%) indicated that it should take up to 15 minutes. Patients’ opinions differed widely on the preferred frequency of follow-up. Conclusions: Not having pain and good wound healing were considered very important during the whole recovery of burns; in addition, physical functioning at pre-injury level, being independent, and taking care of yourself were deemed very important in the short and long-term. These outcomes are recommended to be used in burn care and research, although careful selection of outcomes remains crucial as patients prefer online questionnaires up to 15 minutes.</p