Systematic overview of economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation

Background: Health related rehabilitation is instrumental in improving functioning and promoting participation by people with disabilities. To make clinical and policy decisions about health-related rehabilitation, resource allocation and cost issues need to be considered. Objectives: To conduct an overview of systematic reviews (SRs) on economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation. Methods: We searched multiple databases to identify relevant SRs of economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation. Review quality was assessed by AMSTAR checklist. Results: We included 64 SRs, most of which included economic evaluations alongside randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The review quality was low to moderate (AMSTAR score 5-8) in 35, and high (score 9-11) in 29 of the included SRs. The included SRs addressed various health conditions, including spinal or other pain conditions (n=14), age-related problems (11), stroke (7), musculoskeletal disorders (6), heart diseases (4), pulmonary (3), mental health problems (3), and injury (3). Physiotherapy was the most commonly evaluated rehabilitation intervention in the included SRs (n=24). Other commonly evaluated interventions included multidisciplinary programmes (14); behavioural, educational or psychological interventions (11); home-based interventions (11); complementary therapy (6); self-management (6); and occupational therapy (4). Conclusions: Although the available evidence is often described as limited, inconsistent or inconclusive, some rehabilitation interventions were cost-effective or showed cost-saving in a variety of disability conditions. Available evidence comes predominantly from high income countries, therefore economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation are urgently required in less resourced settings

Diagnostic accuracy of a clinical diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: An international case-cohort study

We conducted an international study of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) diagnosis among a large group of physicians and compared their diagnostic performance to a panel of IPF experts.A total of 1141 respiratory physicians and 34 IPF experts participated. Participants evaluated 60 cases of interstitial lung disease (ILD) without interdisciplinary consultation. Diagnostic agreement was measured using the weighted kappa coefficient (κw). Prognostic discrimination between IPF and other ILDs was used to validate diagnostic accuracy for first-choice diagnoses of IPF and were compared using the C-index.A total of 404 physicians completed the study. Agreement for IPF diagnosis was higher among expert physicians (κw=0.65, IQR 0.53–0.72, p less than 0.0001) or physicians with access to multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings (κw=0.54, IQR 0.45–0.64, p less than 0.0001). The prognostic accuracy of academic physicians with greater than 20 years of experience (C-index=0.72, IQR 0.0–0.73, p=0.229) and non-university hospital physicians with more than 20 years of experience, attending weekly MDT meetings (C-index=0.72, IQR 0.70–0.72, p=0.052), did not differ significantly (p=0.229 and p=0.052 respectively) from the expert panel (C-index=0.74 IQR 0.72–0.75).Experienced respiratory physicians at university-based institutions diagnose IPF with similar prognostic accuracy to IPF experts. Regular MDT meeting attendance improves the prognostic accuracy of experienced non-university practitioners to levels achieved by IPF experts

High-resolution CT phenotypes in pulmonary sarcoidosis: a multinational Delphi consensus study

One view of sarcoidosis is that the term covers many different diseases. However, no classification framework exists for the future exploration of pathogenetic pathways, genetic or trigger predilections, patterns of lung function impairment, or treatment separations, or for the development of diagnostic algorithms or relevant outcome measures. We aimed to establish agreement on high-resolution CT (HRCT) phenotypic separations in sarcoidosis to anchor future CT research through a multinational two-round Delphi consensus process. Delphi participants included members of the Fleischner Society and the World Association of Sarcoidosis and other Granulomatous Disorders, as well as members' nominees. 146 individuals (98 chest physicians, 48 thoracic radiologists) from 28 countries took part, 144 of whom completed both Delphi rounds. After rating of 35 Delphi statements on a five-point Likert scale, consensus was achieved for 22 (63%) statements. There was 97% agreement on the existence of distinct HRCT phenotypes, with seven HRCT phenotypes that were categorised by participants as non-fibrotic or likely to be fibrotic. The international consensus reached in this Delphi exercise justifies the formulation of a CT classification as a basis for the possible definition of separate diseases. Further refinement of phenotypes with rapidly achievable CT studies is now needed to underpin the development of a formal classification of sarcoidosis