Search

Study Design: A prospective cohort study.Objective: To investigate construct validity by examining the convergent and discriminative validity of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function 4a (PROMIS-PF4) questionnaire in low back pain (LBP) patients seeking care from Danish chiropractors.Summary Of Background Data: The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) is often used to assess physical functioning in LBP. However, it consists of 24 items, which is time consuming to complete in clinical practice. The PROMIS-PF4 questionnaire has only four items and may be more applicable for clinical use.Materials and Methods: Patients with LBP seeking care from chiropractors in Denmark completed the PROMIS-PF4, RMDQ, Subgroups for Targeted Treatment (STarT) Back screening tool, and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) in advance of their first appointment with the chiropractor. Convergent validity was assessed using Spearman correlation coefficients between the PROMIS-PF4 and RMDQ and NPRS, respectively. Discriminative validity of the PROMIS-PF4 was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) when plotting the PROMIS-PF4 t score against a reference case for RMDQ; NPRS; and high and low risk groups using the STarT Back screening tool.Results: Among 356 patients the PROMIS-PF4 questionnaire had strong convergent validity with the RMDQ ( r =-0.76) and moderate convergent validity with the NPRS ( r =-0.42). The PROMIS-PF4 had good and acceptable discriminative validity for disability (AUC=0.88) and high risk of persisting disability (AUC=0.72), and poor or no discriminative validity for pain intensity (AUC=0.66) and low-risk of persisting disability (AUC=0.26), respectively.Conclusion: As hypothesized, for convergent validity the PROMIS-PF4 has stronger correlation with the RMDQ than the NPRS and good discriminative validity for identifying patients with pain-related disability and at high risk of persisting disability but not for identifying pain intensity or low-risk of persisting disability. Consequently, the PROMIS-PF4 has adequate construct validity for measuring pain-related disability in an LBP population in chiropractic care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The variability in pain drawing styles and analysis methods has raised concerns about the reliability of pain drawings as a screening tool for nonpain symptoms. In this study, a data-driven approach to pain drawing analysis has been used to enhance the reliability. The aim was to identify distinct clusters of pain patterns by using latent class analysis (LCA) on 46 predefined anatomical areas of a freehand digital pain drawing. Clusters were described in the clinical domains of activity limitation, pain intensity, and psychological factors. A total of 21,123 individuals were included from 2 subgroups by primary pain complaint (low back pain (LBP) [n = 15,465]) or midback/neck pain (MBPNP) [n = 5658]). Five clusters were identified for the LBP subgroup: LBP and radiating pain (19.9%), radiating pain (25.8%), local LBP (24.8%), LBP and whole leg pain (18.7%), and widespread pain (10.8%). Four clusters were identified for the MBPNP subgroup: MBPNP bilateral posterior (19.9%), MBPNP unilateral posterior + anterior (23.6%), MBPNP unilateral posterior (45.4%), and widespread pain (11.1%). The clusters derived by LCA corresponded to common, specific, and recognizable clinical presentations. Statistically significant differences were found between these clusters in every self-reported health domain. Similarly, for both LBP and MBPNP, pain drawings involving more extensive pain areas were associated with higher activity limitation, more intense pain, and more psychological distress. This study presents a versatile data-driven approach for analyzing pain drawings to assist in managing spinal pain., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Background and Objectives: Medicaid beneficiaries in many American academic medical centers can receive care in a separate facility than those not covered by Medicaid. We aimed to identify possible disparities in care by evaluating the association between facility type (integrated faculty practice or Medicaid-only outpatient clinic ) and telehealth utilization in people with epilepsy., Methods: We performed retrospective analyses using structured data from the Mount Sinai Health System electronic medical record data from January 2003 to August 2021. We identified people of all ages with epilepsy who were followed by an epileptologist after January 3, 2018, using a validated ICD-9-CM/10-CM coded case definition. We evaluated associations between practice setting and telehealth utilization, an outcome measure that captures the evolving delivery of neurologic care in a post-coronavirus disease 2019 era, using multivariable logistic regression., Results: We identified 4,586 people with epilepsy seen by an epileptologist, including Medicaid beneficiaries in the Medicaid outpatient clinic (N = 387), Medicaid beneficiaries in the faculty practice after integration (N = 723), and non-Medicaid beneficiaries (N = 3,476). Patients not insured by Medicaid were significantly older (average age 40 years vs 29 in persons seen in Medicaid-only outpatient clinic and 28.5 in persons insured with Medicaid seen in faculty practice [ p < 0.0001]). Medicaid beneficiaries were more likely to have drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), with 51.94% of people seen in Medicaid-only outpatient clinic, 41.63% of Medicaid beneficiaries seen in faculty practice, and 37.2% of non-Medicaid beneficiaries having DRE ( p < 0.0001). Medicaid outpatient clinic patients were less likely to have telehealth visits (phone or video); 81.65% of patients in the Medicaid outpatient clinic having no telehealth visits vs 71.78% of Medicaid beneficiaries in the faculty practice and 70.89% of non-Medicaid beneficiaries ( p < 0.0001). In an adjusted logistic regression analysis, Medicaid beneficiaries had lower odds (0.61; 95% CI 0.46-0.81) of using teleneurology compared with all patients seen in faculty practice ( p = 0.0005)., Discussion: Compared with the Medicaid-only outpatient clinic, we found higher telehealth utilization in the integrated faculty practice with no difference by insurance status (Medicaid vs other). Integrated care may be associated with better health care delivery in people with epilepsy; thus, future research should examine its impact on other epilepsy-related outcomes.

Purpose: Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have comorbid epilepsy at much higher rates than the general population, and about 30% will be refractory to medication. Patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) should be referred for surgical evaluation, yet many with ASD and DRE are not resective surgical candidates. The aim of this study was to examine the response of this population to the responsive neurostimulator (RNS) System., Methods: This multicenter study evaluated patients with ASD and DRE who underwent RNS System placement. Patients were included if they had the RNS System placed for 1 year or more. Seizure reduction and behavioral outcomes were reported. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis., Results: Nineteen patients with ASD and DRE had the RNS System placed at 5 centers. Patients were between the ages of 11 and 29 (median 20) years. Fourteen patients were male, whereas five were female. The device was implanted from 1 to 5 years. Sixty-three percent of all patients experienced a >50% seizure reduction, with 21% of those patients being classified as super responders (seizure reduction >90%). For the super responders, two of the four patients had the device implanted for >2 years. The response rate was 70% for those in whom the device was implanted for >2 years. Improvements in behaviors as measured by the Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement scale were noted in 79%. No complications from the surgery were reported., Conclusions: Based on the authors' experience in this small cohort of patients, the RNS System seems to be a promising surgical option in people with ASD-DRE., Competing Interests: S. Ghatan is an unpaid consultant to Neuropace. F. Panov is a consultant for Zimmer Biomet and Neuropace. The remaining authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society.)