Search

Introduction: Quality of life is included in the economic evaluation of health services by measuring the preference for health states, i.e. health state utilities. However, most intervention studies include a disease-specific, not a utility, instrument. Consequently, there has been increasing use of statistical mapping algorithms which permit utilities to be estimated from a disease-specific instrument. The present paper provides such algorithms between the MacNew Heart Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire (MacNew) instrument and six multi-attribute utility (MAU) instruments, the Euroqol (EQ-5D), the Short Form 6D (SF-6D), the Health Utilities Index (HUI) 3, the Quality of Wellbeing (QWB), the 15D (15 Dimension) and the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL-8D). Methods: Heart disease patients and members of the healthy public were recruited from six countries. Non-parametric rank tests were used to compare subgroup utilities and MacNew scores. Mapping algorithms were estimated using three separate statistical techniques. Results: Mapping algorithms achieved a high degree of precision. Based on the mean absolute error and the intra class correlation the preferred mapping is MacNew into SF-6D or 15D. Using the R squared statistic the preferred mapping is MacNew into AQoL-8D. Implications for research: The algorithms reported in this paper enable MacNew data to be mapped into utilities predicted from any of six instruments. This permits studies which have included the MacNew to be used in cost utility analyses which, in turn, allows the comparison of services with interventions across the health system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To formally evaluate the written discharge advice for people with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Methods: Eleven publications met the inclusion criteria: (1) intended for adults; (2) ≤two A4 pages; (3) published in English; (4) freely accessible; and (5) currently used (or suitable for use) in Australian hospital emergency departments or similar settings. Two independent raters evaluated the content and style of each publication against established standards. The readability of the publication, the diagnostic term(s) contained in it and a modified Patient Literature Usefulness Index (mPLUI) were also evaluated. Results: The mean content score was 19.18 ± 8.53 (maximum = 31) and the mean style score was 6.8 ± 1.34 (maximum = 8). The mean Flesch-Kincaid reading ease score was 66.42 ± 4.3. The mean mPLUI score was 65.86 ± 14.97 (maximum = 100). Higher scores on these metrics indicate more desirable properties. Over 80% of the publications used mixed diagnostic terminology. One publication scored optimally on two of the four metrics and highly on the others. Discussion: The content, style, readability and usefulness of written mTBI discharge advice was highly variable. The provision of written information to patients with mTBI is advised, but this variability in materials highlights the need for evaluation before distribution. Areas are identified to guide the improvement of written mTBI discharge advice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective An international panel of pain specialists (anesthesiology, neurology, neurosurgery, and psychology) and research methodologists developed a screening tool to identify patients who may be suitable for spinal cord stimulation ( SCS)-the Refractory Chronic Pain Screening Tool ( RCPST) prototype. We describe a feasibility study to explore practicality and validity of this prototype. Design Consecutive outpatients were screened in two centers ( United Kingdom and United States). Sixty chronic pain adults without satisfactory pain relief despite treatment were assessed using RCPST (by pain specialist without expertise in neurostimulation) and then evaluated by two pain specialists experienced in SCS implantation and management to determine whether the patient should be referred for SCS. To maintain blinding, the participating physicians did not inform each other or the patient of assessment outcome. Sensitivity and specificity of the RCPST prototype were calculated using implanters' judgment as 'gold standard.' Results The average age of patients was 47.7 years; 53% were female. Fifty-seven patients completed the study (one withdrew consent, two lost to follow-up). The pain specialists agreed the prototype was easy to use and took <10 minutes to complete. Implanter agreement was moderate ( Kappa: 0.63, 95% confidence interval: 0.35-0.91). The prototype had low sensitivity (40%, 19-61%) and moderate specificity (78%, 65-92%). Using the same questionnaire with a modified decision algorithm, new prototypes were generated with range of high sensitivity (80-100%) and specificity (89-97%) values. Conclusions The RCPST aims to identify patients that should be referred for consideration for neurostimulation. The final implant decision requires appropriate neurological diagnostic workup, psychological assessment, and trial stimulation. RCPST was considered practical for routine clinical practice and contained appropriate questions. Sensitivity needs to be improved. A future study should select and validate the ideal RCPST prototype. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]