Search

Symptoms of asthma and COPD often overlap, and both diseases can co-exist in one patient. The asthma control questionnaire (ACQ) and clinical COPD questionnaire (CCQ) were developed to assess disease burden in respectively asthma or COPD. This study explores the possibility of creating a new questionnaire to assess disease burden in all obstructive lung diseases by integrating and reducing questions of the ACQ and CCQ. Data of patients with asthma, COPD and asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) were collected from a primary and secondary care center. Patients completed ACQ and CCQ on the same day. Linear regression tested correlations. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used for item reduction. The secondary cohort with asthma and COPD patients was used for initial question selection (development cohort). These results were reproduced in the primary care cohort and secondary cohort of patients with ACO. The development cohort comprised 252 patients with asthma and 96 with COPD. Correlation between ACQ and CCQ in asthma was R = 0.82, and in COPD R = 0.83. PCA determined a selection of 9 questions. Reproduction in primary care data (asthma n = 1110, COPD n = 1041, ACO = 355) and secondary care data of ACO patients (n = 53) resulted in similar correlations and PCA-derived selection of questions. In conclusion, PCA determined a selection of nine questions of the ACQ and CCQ: working title 'the Obstructive Lung Disease Questionnaire'. These results suggest that this pragmatic set of questions might be sufficient to assess disease burden in obstructive lung disease in both primary as secondary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Limited evidence exists for how patient preference elicitation methods compare directly. This study compares a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and swing-weighting (SW) by eliciting preferences for glucose-monitoring devices in a population of diabetes patients. Methods: A sample of Dutch adults with type 1 or 2 diabetes (n = 459) completed an online survey assessing their preferences for glucose-monitoring devices, consisting of both a DCE and a SW exercise. Half the sample completed the DCE first; the other half completed the SW first. For the DCE, the relative importance of the attributes of the devices was determined using a mixed-logit model. For the SW, the relative importance of the attributes was based on ranks and points allocated to the 'swing' from the worst to the best level of the attribute. The preference outcomes and self-reported response burden were directly compared between the two methods. Results: Participants reported they perceived the DCE to be easier to understand and answer compared to the SW. Both methods revealed that cost and precision of the device were the most important attributes. However, the DCE had a 14.9-fold difference between the most and least important attribute, while the SW had a 1.4-fold difference. The weights derived from the SW were almost evenly distributed between all attributes. Conclusions: The DCE was better received by participants, and generated larger weight differences between each attribute level, making it the more informative method in our case study. This method comparison provides further evidence of the degree of method suitability and trustworthiness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease (GOLD) 2020 emphasizes that there is only a weak correlation between FEV1, symptoms and impairment of the health status of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Various studies aimed to identify COPD phenotypes by cluster analyses, but behavioral aspects besides smoking were rarely included. Methods: The aims of the study were to investigate whether (i) clustering analyses are in line with the classification into GOLD ABCD groups; (ii) clustering according to Burgel et al. (Eur Respir J. 36(3):531–9, 2010) can be reproduced in a real-world COPD cohort; and (iii) addition of new behavioral variables alters the clustering outcome. Principal component and hierarchical cluster analyses were applied to real-world clinical data of COPD patients newly referred to secondary care (n = 155). We investigated if the obtained clusters paralleled GOLD ABCD subgroups and determined the impact of adding several variables, including quality of life (QOL), fatigue, satisfaction relationship, air trapping, steps per day and activities of daily living, on clustering. Results: Using the appropriate corresponding variables, we identified clusters that largely reflected the GOLD ABCD groups, but we could not reproduce Burgel's clinical phenotypes. Adding six new variables resulted in the formation of four new clusters that mainly differed from each other in the following parameters: number of steps per day, activities of daily living and QOL. Conclusions: We could not reproduce previously identified clinical COPD phenotypes in an independent population of COPD patients. Our findings therefore indicate that COPD phenotypes based on cluster analysis may not be a suitable basis for treatment strategies for individual patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ehealth platforms, since the outbreak of COVID-19 more important than ever, can support self-management in patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). The aim of this observational study is to explore the impact of healthcare professional involvement on the adherence of patients to an eHealth platform. We evaluated the usage of an eHealth platform by patients who used the platform individually compared with patients in a blended setting, where healthcare professionals were involved.Methods: In this observational cohort study, log data from September 2011 until January 2018 were extracted from the eHealth platform Curavista. Patients with COPD who completed at least one Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) were included for analyses (n = 299). In 57% (n = 171) of the patients, the eHealth platform was used in a blended setting, either in hospital (n = 128) or primary care (n = 29). To compare usage of the platform between patients who used the platform independently or with a healthcare professional, we applied propensity score matching and performed adjusted Poisson regression analysis on CCQ-submission rate.Results: Using the eHealth platform in a blended setting was associated with a 3.25 higher CCQ-submission rate compared to patients using the eHealth platform independently. Within the blended setting, the CCQ-submission rate was 1.83 higher in the hospital care group than in the primary care group.Conclusion: It is shown that COPD patients used the platform more frequently in a blended care setting compared to patients who used the eHealth platform independently, adjusted for age, sex and disease burden. Blended care seems essential for adherence to eHealth programs in COPD, which in turn may improve self-management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The importance of economic evaluation in decision making is growing with increasing budgetary pressures on health systems. Diverse economic evidence is available for a range of interventions across national contexts within Europe, but little attention has been given to identifying evidence gaps that, if filled, could contribute to more efficient allocation of resources. One objective of the Research Agenda for Health Economic Evaluation project is to determine the most important methodological evidence gaps for the ten highest burden conditions in the European Union (EU), and to suggest ways of filling these gaps. Methods: The highest burden conditions in the EU by Disability Adjusted Life Years were determined using the Global Burden of Disease study. Clinical interventions were identified for each condition based on published guidelines, and economic evaluations indexed in MEDLINE were mapped to each intervention. A panel of public health and health economics experts discussed the evidence during a workshop and identified evidence gaps. Results: The literature analysis contributed to identifying cross-cutting methodological and technical issues, which were considered by the expert panel to derive methodological research priorities. Conclusions: The panel suggests a research agenda for health economics which incorporates the use of real-world evidence in the assessment of new and existing interventions; increased understanding of cost-effectiveness according to patient characteristics beyond the "-omics" approach to inform both investment and disinvestment decisions; methods for assessment of complex interventions; improved cross-talk between economic evaluations from health and other sectors; early health technology assessment; and standardized, transferable approaches to economic modeling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. The aims were to compare the performance of cardiovascular risk calculators, Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and QRISK2, in RA and matched non-RA patients and to evaluate whether their performance could be enhanced by the addition of CRP. Methods. We conducted a retrospective analysis, using a clinical practice data set linked to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data from the UK. Patients presenting with at least one RA diagnosis code and no prior cardiovascular events were matched to non-RA patients using disease risk scores. The overall performance of the FRS and QRISK2 was compared between cohorts, and assessed with and without CRP in the RA cohort using C-Index, Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and the net reclassification index (NRI). Results. Four thousand seven hundred and eighty RA patients met the inclusion criteria and were followed for a mean of 3.8 years. The C-Index for the FRS in the non-RA and RA cohort was 0.783 and 0.754 (P < 0.001) and that of the QRISK2 was 0.770 and 0.744 (P < 0.001), respectively. Log[CRP] was positively associated with cardiovascular events, but improvements in the FRS and QRISK2 C-Indices as a result of inclusion of CRP were small, from 0.764 to 0.767 (P = 0.026) for FRS and from 0.764 to 0.765 (P = 0.250) for QRISK2. The NRI was 3.2% (95% CI: -2.8, 5.7%) for FRS and -2.0% (95% CI: -5.8, 4.5%) for QRISK2. Conclusion. The C-Index for the FRS and QRISK2 was significantly better in the non-RA compared with RA patients. The addition of CRP in both equations was not associated with a significant improvement in reclassification based on NRI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The importance of economic evaluation in decision making is growing with increasing budgetary pressures on health systems. Diverse economic evidence is available for a range of interventions across national contexts within Europe, but little attention has been given to identifying evidence gaps that, if filled, could contribute to more efficient allocation of resources. One objective of the Research Agenda for Health Economic Evaluation project is to determine the most important methodological evidence gaps for the ten highest burden conditions in the European Union (EU), and to suggest ways of filling these gaps.Methods: The highest burden conditions in the EU by Disability Adjusted Life Years were determined using the Global Burden of Disease study. Clinical interventions were identified for each condition based on published guidelines, and economic evaluations indexed in MEDLINE were mapped to each intervention. A panel of public health and health economics experts discussed the evidence during a workshop and identified evidence gaps.Results: The literature analysis contributed to identifying cross-cutting methodological and technical issues, which were considered by the expert panel to derive methodological research priorities.Conclusions: The panel suggests a research agenda for health economics which incorporates the use of real-world evidence in the assessment of new and existing interventions; increased understanding of cost-effectiveness according to patient characteristics beyond the "-omics" approach to inform both investment and disinvestment decisions; methods for assessment of complex interventions; improved cross-talk between economic evaluations from health and other sectors; early health technology assessment; and standardized, transferable approaches to economic modeling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]