Herding: a new phenomenon affecting medical decision-making in multiple sclerosis care? Lessons learned from DIScUTIR MS

Abstract Purpose Herding is a phenomenon by which individuals follow the behavior of others rather than deciding independently on the basis of their own private information. A herding-like phenomenon can occur in multiple sclerosis (MS) when a neurologist follows a therapeutic recommendation by a colleague even though it is not supported by best practice clinical guidelines. Limited information is currently available on the role of herding in medical care. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence (and its associated factors) of herding in the management of MS. Methods We conducted a study among neurologists with expertise in MS care throughout Spain. Participants answered questions regarding the management of 20 case scenarios commonly encountered in clinical practice and completed 3 surveys and 4 experimental paradigms based on behavioral economics. The herding experiment consisted of a case scenario of a 40-year-old woman who has been stable for 3 years on subcutaneous interferon and developed a self-limited neurological event. There were no new magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesions. Her neurological examination and disability scores were unchanged. She was advised by an MS neurologist to switch from interferon to fingolimod against best practice guidelines. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate factors associated with herding. Results Out of 161 neurologists who were invited to participate, 96 completed the study (response rate: 60%). Herding was present in 75 (78.1%), having a similar prevalence in MS experts and general neurologists (68.8% vs 82.8%; P=0.12). In multivariate analyses, the number of MS patients seen per week was positively associated with herding (odds ratio [OR] 1.08, 95% CI 1.01–1.14). Conversely, physician’s age, gender, years of practice, setting of practice, or risk preferences were not associated with herding. Conclusion Herding was a common phenomenon affecting nearly 8 out of 10 neurologists caring for MS patients. Herding may affect medical decisions and lead to poorer outcomes in the management of MS

The Role of Prescribing Generic (Non-proprietary) Drugs in the Prevalence of Therapeutic Inertia in Multiple Sclerosis Care

Importance: The prescription of generic (non-proprietary) compared to brand-name drugs is increasing worldwide. In many developing and emerging countries, generics companies market products at similar costs as brand-name competitors benefiting from more flexible compliance rules and regulations for marketing their products in the health system. Together, this phenomenon may influence prescriber's behavior (e.g., maintaining the same treatment despite guideline's recommendations or despite evidence of disease progression).Objectives: To compare the prevalence of therapeutic inertia (TI) between primary prescription of brand-name vs. generic drugs in the management of MS in Argentina.Design: We conducted a population-based online study comprising 117 neurologists with expertise in MS. Participants answered questions regarding their clinical practice, most commonly prescribed disease modifying agents, and therapeutic choices of 10 simulated case-scenarios that assessed TI. Inertia was defined as the lack of treatment initiation or escalation despite evidence of clinical and radiological activity (8 case-scenarios, 720 individual responses). We created the generic-brand name score (GBS) according to the 5 most frequently prescribed generic (n = 16) vs. brand-name (n = 9) drugs for MS, where scores higher than 1 indicated higher prescription of generic drugs and scores lower than 1 indicated higher prescription of brand-name agents. Candidate predictors of prescribing generic drugs included demographic data, MS specialist vs. general neurologist, practice setting, years of practice, volume of MS patients, risk preferences, costs of annual treatment.Participants and setting: population-based prospective study using including neurologists who care for patients with multiple sclerosis across Argentina.Exposure: prescription of generic vs. brand-name MS drugsMain outcome of interest: Therapeutic inertia (TI), defined as lack of treatment escalation when goals are unmet. Secondary outcomes included factors associated with generic drug prescription and costs of MS treatment.Results: Ninety participants completed the study (completion rate 76.9%). TI was observed in 153 (21.3%) of participants' responses. The evaluation of aggregate responses revealed a mean GBS score (SD) of 3.44 (2.1), with 46 (51.1%) participants having a GBS equal to or higher than 1. Older age (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.00–1.42), being a general neurologist (OR 3.91; 95% CI 1.19–12.8), and being more willing to take risks in multiple domains (SOEP score OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01–1.12) were associated with higher prescription of generic drugs in MS care. Costs of treatment were not associated with prescribing generic drugs. There was no difference in the annual costs of MS treatment for primary prescribers of brand-name vs. generic drugs (67,500 US$vs. 67,496 US$; p = 0.99).The evaluation of individual responses revealed that participants with higher prescription of generics—reflected by a higher GBS—had higher incident risk of TI (mean GBS 3.61 for TI vs. 2.96 for no TI; p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that a prescription of generic agents was associated with an increased incident risk of TI (OR 1.56; 95%CI 1.07–2.29). There was no difference in the annual costs of MS treatment for participants that exhibited TI vs. those without TI (67,426 US$vs. 67,704 US$; p = 0.66).Conclusions: General neurologist, older age, and willingness to take risks were associated with increased prescription of generic drugs despite similar costs compared to brand-name agents. In our study, the prescription of generic-MS drugs was associated with a higher incident risk of therapeutic inertia

Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation (Review)

Copyright © 2017 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. This review is made available in accordance with Cochrane Database of Systematic Review's repositories policyBackground Virtual reality and interactive video gaming have emerged as recent treatment approaches in stroke rehabilitation with commercial gaming consoles in particular, being rapidly adopted in clinical settings. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published first in 2011 and then again in 2015. Objectives Primary objective: to determine the efficacy of virtual reality compared with an alternative intervention or no intervention on upper limb function and activity. Secondary objectives: to determine the efficacy of virtual reality compared with an alternative intervention or no intervention on: gait and balance, global motor function, cognitive function, activity limitation, participation restriction, quality of life, and adverse events. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (April 2017), CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and seven additional databases. We also searched trials registries and reference lists. Selection criteria Randomised and quasi‐randomised trials of virtual reality ("an advanced form of human‐computer interface that allows the user to 'interact' with and become 'immersed' in a computer‐generated environment in a naturalistic fashion") in adults after stroke. The primary outcome of interest was upper limb function and activity. Secondary outcomes included gait and balance and global motor function. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently selected trials based on pre‐defined inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A third review author moderated disagreements when required. The review authors contacted investigators to obtain missing information. Main results We included 72 trials that involved 2470 participants. This review includes 35 new studies in addition to the studies included in the previous version of this review. Study sample sizes were generally small and interventions varied in terms of both the goals of treatment and the virtual reality devices used. The risk of bias present in many studies was unclear due to poor reporting. Thus, while there are a large number of randomised controlled trials, the evidence remains mostly low quality when rated using the GRADE system. Control groups usually received no intervention or therapy based on a standard‐care approach. Primary outcome: results were not statistically significant for upper limb function (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.07, 95% confidence intervals (CI) ‐0.05 to 0.20, 22 studies, 1038 participants, low‐quality evidence) when comparing virtual reality to conventional therapy. However, when virtual reality was used in addition to usual care (providing a higher dose of therapy for those in the intervention group) there was a statistically significant difference between groups (SMD 0.49, 0.21 to 0.77, 10 studies, 210 participants, low‐quality evidence). Secondary outcomes: when compared to conventional therapy approaches there were no statistically significant effects for gait speed or balance. Results were statistically significant for the activities of daily living (ADL) outcome (SMD 0.25, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.43, 10 studies, 466 participants, moderate‐quality evidence); however, we were unable to pool results for cognitive function, participation restriction, or quality of life. Twenty‐three studies reported that they monitored for adverse events; across these studies there were few adverse events and those reported were relatively mild. Authors' conclusions We found evidence that the use of virtual reality and interactive video gaming was not more beneficial than conventional therapy approaches in improving upper limb function. Virtual reality may be beneficial in improving upper limb function and activities of daily living function when used as an adjunct to usual care (to increase overall therapy time). There was insufficient evidence to reach conclusions about the effect of virtual reality and interactive video gaming on gait speed, balance, participation, or quality of life. This review found that time since onset of stroke, severity of impairment, and the type of device (commercial or customised) were not strong influencers of outcome. There was a trend suggesting that higher dose (more than 15 hours of total intervention) was preferable as were customised virtual reality programs; however, these findings were not statistically significant

Prognostic indices for early mortality in ischaemic stroke – meta-analysis

Objectives: Several models have been developed to predict mortality in ischaemic stroke. We aimed to evaluate systematically the performance of published stroke prognostic scores. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE in February 2014 for prognostic models (published between 2003 and 2014) used in predicting early mortality (<6 months) after ischaemic stroke. We evaluated discriminant ability of the tools through meta-analysis of the area under the curve receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) or c-statistic. We evaluated the following components of study validity: collection of prognostic variables, neuroimaging, treatment pathways and missing data. Results: We identified 18 articles (involving 163 240 patients) reporting on the performance of prognostic models for mortality in ischaemic stroke, with 15 articles providing AUC for meta-analysis. Most studies were either retrospective, or post hoc analyses of prospectively collected data; all but three reported validation data. The iSCORE had the largest number of validation cohorts (five) within our systematic review and showed good performance in four different countries, pooled AUC 0.84 (95% CI 0.82–0.87). We identified other potentially useful prognostic tools that have yet to be as extensively validated as iSCORE – these include SOAR (2 studies, pooled AUC 0.79, 95% CI 0.78–0.80), GWTG (2 studies, pooled AUC 0.72, 95% CI 0.72–0.72) and PLAN (1 study, pooled AUC 0.85, 95% CI 0.84–0.87). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis has identified and summarized the performance of several prognostic scores with modest to good predictive accuracy for early mortality in ischaemic stroke, with the iSCORE having the broadest evidence base

Traffic Lights Intervention Reduces Therapeutic Inertia: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Multiple Sclerosis Care

Decision making; Disease-modifying therapy; Multiple sclerosisToma de decisiones; Terapia modificadora de la enfermedad; Esclerosis múltiplePresa de decisions; Teràpia modificadora de la malaltia; Esclerosi múltipleBackground: Therapeutic inertia (TI) is a common phenomenon among physicians who care for patients with chronic conditions. We evaluated the efficacy of the traffic light system (TLS) educational intervention to reduce TI among neurologists with MS expertise. Methods: In this randomised, controlled trial, 90 neurologists who provide care to MS patients were randomly assigned to the TLS intervention (n = 45) or to the control group (n = 45). The educational intervention employed the TLS, a behavioral strategy that facilitates therapeutic choices by facilitating reflective decisions. The TLS consisted in a short, structured, single session intervention of 5-7 min duration. Participants made therapeutic choices of 10 simulated case-scenarios. The primary outcome was a reduction in TI based on a published TI score (case-scenarios in which a participant showed TI divided by the total number of scenarios where TI was possible ranging from 0 to 8). Results: All participants completed the study and were included in the primary analysis. TI was lower in the TLS group (1.47, 95% CI 1.32-1.61) compared to controls (1.93; 95% CI 1.79-2.08). The TLS group had a lower prevalence of TI compared to controls (0.67, 95% CI 0.62-0.71 vs. 0.82, 95% CI 0.78-0.86; p = 0.001). The multivariate analysis, adjusted for age, specialty, years of practice, and risk preference showed a 70% reduction in TI for the TLS intervention compared to controls (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.10-0.89). Conclusions: In this randomized trial, the TLS strategy decreases the incidence of TI in MS care irrespective of age, expertise, years for training, and risk preference of participants, which would lead to better patient outcomes

Regret and Therapeutic Decisions in Multiple Sclerosis Care: Literature Review and Research Protocol

Background: Decisions based on erroneous assessments may result in unrealistic patient and family expectations, suboptimal advice, incorrect treatment, or costly medical errors. Regret is a common emotion in daily life that involves counterfactual thinking when considering alternative choices. Limited information is available on care-related regret affecting healthcare professionals managing patients with multiple sclerosis (MS).Methods: We reviewed identified gaps in the literature by searching for the combination of the following keywords in Pubmed: “regret and decision,” “regret and physicians,” and “regret and nurses.” An expert panel of neurologists, a nurse, a psychiatrist, a pharmacist, and a psychometrics specialist participated in the study design. Care-related regret will be assessed by a behavioral battery including the standardized questionnaire Regret Intensity Scale (RIS-10) and 15 new specific items. Six items will evaluate regret in the most common social domains affecting individuals (financial, driving, sports—recreation, work, own health, and confidence in people). Another nine items will explore past and recent regret experiences in common situations experienced by healthcare professionals caring for patients with MS. We will also assess concomitant behavioral characteristics of healthcare professionals that could be associated with regret: coping strategies, life satisfaction, mood, positive social behaviors, occupational burnout, and tolerance to uncertainty.Planned Outcomes: This is the first comprehensive and standardized protocol to assess care-related regret and associated behavioral factors among healthcare professionals managing MS. These results will allow to understand and ameliorate regret in healthcare professionals.Spanish National Register (SL42129-20/598-E)