Search

Nana Brochmann,1 Esben Meulengracht Flachs,2 Anne Illemann Christensen,3 Marie Bak,1 Christen Lykkegaard Andersen,1 Knud Juel,3 Hans Carl Hasselbalch,1 Ann-Dorthe Zwisler,4 Nina Rottmann4–6 1Department of Hematology, Zealand University Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Roskilde, Denmark; 2Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Bispebjerg University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; 3National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark; 4Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care, Odense University Hospital, University of Southern Denmark, Nyborg, Denmark; 5Department of Psychology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; 6Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark Objective: We sought to determine the prevalence and severity of anxiety and depression among patients with Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) and respective associations of anxiety and depression with demographic and lifestyle factors, comorbidity burden, duration of MPN disease, financial difficulties, and health-related quality of life (QoL). Methods: This study used data from a nationwide, population-based, cross-sectional survey of health-related QoL in MPN patients in Denmark called the MPNhealthSurvey. Individuals with a diagnosis of MPN in the National Patient Register were invited. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was used to assess the prevalence and severity of anxiety and depression. The associations of anxiety and depression with age, sex, education, body mass index (BMI), smoking, alcohol intake, physical activity, comorbidity burden, duration of MPN disease, financial difficulties, symptom burden, sexual problems, fatigue, functioning, and global health/QoL were examined. Results: In total, 2,029 patients completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. The prevalence of anxiety, depression, and both was 21%, 12%, and 8%, respectively. Many participants who reported anxiety or depression exhibited mild symptoms. Middle-aged and elderly participants had lower odds of experiencing anxiety and depression when compared to younger participants, and females had higher odds of anxiety compared to males. Participants with higher education had lower odds of anxiety compared to those with lower education. Current smokers and ex-smokers had higher odds of anxiety and depression compared to those who had never smoked, and sedentary participants and participants with a lower level of physical activity had higher odds of anxiety and depression compared to participants who performed hard training several times a week. Higher comorbidity burden increased the odds of depression, and greater financial difficulties increased the odds of anxiety and depression. Higher total symptom burden and fatigue burden and higher level of sexual problems increased the odds of anxiety and depression. Finally, lower functional level and global health/quality of life increased the odds of anxiety and depression. BMI, alcohol intake, comorbidity burden, and duration of disease were not substantially associated with anxiety, whereas sex, educational level, and duration of MPN disease were not substantially associated with depression. Conclusion: There may be an unmet need in handling psychological distress in MPN patients. Future research might explore the utility of screening for psychological distress and the effectiveness of lifestyle interventions, rehabilitation, and MPN-symptom reduction in preventing and treating psychological distress. Keywords: myeloproliferative neoplasm, anxiety, depression, health-related quality of life, patient-reported outcomes

Nana Brochmann,1 Esben Meulengracht Flachs,2 Anne Illemann Christensen,3 Christen Lykkegaard Andersen,1 Knud Juel,3 Hans Carl Hasselbalch,1 Ann-Dorthe Zwisler4 1Department of Hematology, Zealand University Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Roskilde, 2Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Bispebjerg University Hospital, Copenhagen, 3National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen, 4Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care, University of Southern Denmark and Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark Objective: The Department of Hematology, Zealand University Hospital, Denmark, and the National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, created the first nationwide, population-based, and the most comprehensive cross-sectional health-related quality of life (HRQoL) survey of patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). In Denmark, all MPN patients are treated in public hospitals and treatments received are free of charge for these patients. Therefore, MPN patients receive the best available treatment to the extent of its suitability for them and if they wish to receive the treatment. The aims of this article are to describe the survey design and the characteristics of respondents and nonrespondents. Material and methods: Individuals with MPN diagnoses registered in the Danish National Patient Register (NPR) were invited to participate. The registers of the Danish Civil Registration System and Statistics Denmark provided information regarding demographics. The survey contained 120 questions: validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires and additional questions addressing lifestyle. Results: A total of 4,704 individuals were registered with MPN diagnoses in the NPR of whom 4,236 were eligible for participation and 2,613 (62%) responded. Overall, the respondents covered the broad spectrum of MPN patients, but patients 70–79 years old, living with someone, of a Danish/Western ethnicity, and with a higher level of education exhibited the highest response rate. Conclusion: A nationwide, population-based, and comprehensive HRQoL survey of MPN patients in Denmark was undertaken (MPNhealthSurvey). We believe that the respondents broadly represent the MPN population in Denmark. However, the differences between respondents and nonrespondents have to be taken into consideration when examining PROs from the respondents. The results of the investigation of the respondents’ HRQoL in this survey will follow in future articles. Keywords: survey design, cross-sectional survey, nationwide survey, patient-reported outcomes, health-related quality of life, myeloproliferative neoplasms

Ann-Dorthe Zwisler,1 Henriette Knold Rossau,1 Anne Nakano,2,3 Sussie Foghmar,4 Regina Eichhorst,5 Eva Prescott,6 Charlotte Cerqueira,7 Anne Merete Boas Soja,4 Gunnar H Gislason,8–10 Mogens Lytken Larsen,5 Ulla Overgaard Andersen,11 Ida Gustafsson,4 Kristian K Thomsen,12 Lene Boye Hansen,13 Signe Hammer,14 Lone Viggers,15 Bo Christensen,16 Birgitte Kvist,17 Cecilie Lindström Egholm,18 Ole May19 On behalf of the Working Group of Preventive Cardiology and Rehabilitation, Danish Society of Cardiology, and the Working Group of Cardiac Clinical Registries, Danish Society of Cardiology 1Danish Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care, Odense University Hospital and University of Southern Denmark, Odense, 2Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, 3Registry Support Centre (West) – Clinical Quality Improvement & Health Informatics, Aarhus, 4Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, 5Department of Cardiology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, 6Department of Cardiology, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, 7Registry Support Centre (East) – Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Research Centre for Prevention and Health, the Capital Region of Denmark, Glostrup, 8Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Hellerup, 9The Danish Heart Foundation, Copenhagen, 10The National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, 11Department of Cardiology, Holbaek Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, 12Department of Cardiology, Hospital of Southwest Jutland, Esbjerg, 13Department of Cardiology, Gentofte Hospital, Gentofte, 14Department of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy, Herlev Hospital, Herlev, 15Department of Nutrition, Regional Hospital West Jutland, Holstebro, 16Department of General Medicine, School of Public Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, 17Department of Health Care and Prevention, Municipality of Frederikshavn, Frederikshavn, 18The Regional Research Unit, Region Zealand, Roskilde, 19Department of Medicine, Cardiovascular Research Unit, Regional Hospital Herning, Herning, Denmark Aim of database: The Danish Cardiac Rehabilitation Database (DHRD) aims to improve the quality of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) to the benefit of patients with coronary heart disease (CHD).Study population: Hospitalized patients with CHD with stenosis on coronary angiography treated with percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, or medication alone. Reporting is mandatory for all hospitals in Denmark delivering CR. The database was initially implemented in 2013 and was fully running from August 14, 2015, thus comprising data at a patient level from the latter date onward.Main variables: Patient-level data are registered by clinicians at the time of entry to CR directly into an online system with simultaneous linkage to other central patient registers. Follow-up data are entered after 6 months. The main variables collected are related to key outcome and performance indicators of CR: referral and adherence, lifestyle, patient-related outcome measures, risk factor control, and medication. Program-level online data are collected every third year.Descriptive data: Based on administrative data, approximately 14,000 patients with CHD are hospitalized at 35 hospitals annually, with 75% receiving one or more outpatient rehabilitation services by 2015. The database has not yet been running for a full year, which explains the use of approximations.Conclusion: The DHRD is an online, national quality improvement database on CR, aimed at patients with CHD. Mandatory registration of data at both patient level as well as program level is done on the database. DHRD aims to systematically monitor the quality of CR over time, in order to improve the quality of CR throughout Denmark to benefit patients. Keywords: secondary prevention, coronary heart disease, cardiovascular prevention, clinical quality registry, clinical database, quality improvement