Responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L in elective shoulder surgery: Does it adequately represent patient experience?

Development of a decision analytical framework to prioritise operating room capacity: lessons learnt from an empirical example on delayed elective surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic in a hospital in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

To develop a prioritisation framework to support priority setting for elective surgeries after COVID-19 based on the impact on patient well-being and cost.

DESIGN

We developed decision analytical models to estimate the consequences of delayed elective surgical procedures (eg, total hip replacement, bariatric surgery or septoplasty).

SETTING

The framework was applied to a large hospital in the Netherlands.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality measures impacts on quality of life and costs were taken into account and combined to calculate net monetary losses per week delay, which quantifies the total loss for society expressed in monetary terms. Net monetary losses were weighted by operating times.

RESULTS

We studied 13 common elective procedures from four specialties. Highest loss in quality of life due to delayed surgery was found for total hip replacement (utility loss of 0.27, ie, 99 days lost in perfect health); the lowest for arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (utility loss of 0.05, ie, 18 days lost in perfect health). Costs of surgical delay per patient were highest for bariatric surgery (€31/pp per week) and lowest for arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (-€2/pp per week). Weighted by operating room (OR) time bariatric surgery provides most value (€1.19/pp per OR minute) and arthroscopic partial meniscectomy provides the least value (€0.34/pp per OR minute). In a large hospital the net monetary loss due to prolonged waiting times was €700 840 after the first COVID-19 wave, an increase of 506% compared with the year before.

CONCLUSIONS

This surgical prioritisation framework can be tailored to specific centres and countries to support priority setting for delayed elective operations during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, both in and between surgical disciplines. In the long-term, the framework can contribute to the efficient distribution of OR time and will therefore add to the discussion on appropriate use of healthcare budgets. The online framework can be accessed via: https://stanwijn.shinyapps.io/priORitize/.

Concordance between the schedule for the evaluation of individual quality of life-direct weighting (SEIQoL-DW) and the EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) measures of quality of life outcomes in adults with X-linked hypophosphatemia

BACKGROUND

Accurate measurement of any constructs in clinical studies is of critical importance, especially if the adoption of an intervention relies on detecting a significant treatment effect where one exists. Under Neutral theory, the amount of relevant and irrelevant indicators selected to operationalise the construct contribute equally to the accuracy of the observation. The Neutral or accurate observation is achieved by observing all relevant indicators only. Generic QoL instruments such as EQ-5D are increasingly being accepted as imprecise, especially in rare diseases, based on the relevance of their indicators. QoL is a construct that embodies a patient's subjectivity, individuality, and local circumstances at measurement. SEIQoL-DW is an instrument designed to respect these characteristics of QoL through eliciting indicators or cues directly from the subject along with the proportion of the overall QoL they contribute. EQ-5D and SEIQoL can therefore be considered as being at opposing ends of accuracy in QoL measurement. XLH is a hereditary, progressive, rare disease characterised by phosphate wasting, affecting both children and adults and impacting their QoL. The purpose of this study was to observe if any change in QoL of adult XLH patients were detectable using EQ-5D, SEIQoL eliciting new cues at each visit, and SEIQoL administering baseline cues overall visits (thereby silencing its time-dependency) versus baseline over 12 months. In addition, any association between the three sets of observations was explored.

RESULTS

All quality of life scores were observed to decrease from baseline by 13.36%, 7.32% and 2.7% based on SEIQoL_{visit_cues}, SEIQoL_{baseline_cues}, and EQ-5D assessments, respectively. The decrease in the quality of life scores was only statistically significant (p = 0.037) for SEIQoL_{visit_cues}. Beyond the baseline visit, the only highly positive and statistically significant pairwise association was between SEIQoL_{visit_cues} and SEIQoL_{baseline_cues} at M6 (ρ = 0.782, P value < 0.05) and M9 (ρ = 0.879, P value < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

EQ-5D and SEIQoL_{baseline_cues} failed to detect the same statistically significant decrease in QoL observed by SEIQoL_{visit_cues}. Both sets of SEIQoL observations were more closely associated with each other than with EQ-5D. Observing constructs such as QoL in rare diseases benefit from a Neutrality in indicator selection and respecting variation in dominance of various indicators over time.

Responsiveness and minimal important change of the Oxford Shoulder Score, EQ-5D, and the Fear-Avoidance Belief Questionnaire Physical Activity subscale in patients undergoing arthroscopic subacromial decompression

Introduction

Adequate responsiveness and knowledge of the minimal important change (MIC) is essential when using patient-reported outcome measures to assess treatment efficacy.

Objective

The objective of this study was to evaluate the responsiveness and MIC of common outcomes in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome undergoing arthroscopic subacromial decompression.

Methods

At baseline and 6 months after surgery, patients completed the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), EQ-5D 5-level utility index, EQ visual analogue scale, Fear-Avoidance Belief Questionnaire Physical Activity subscale (FABQ-PA), assessed pain (pain visual analogue scale), and Subjective Shoulder Value. Furthermore, at the 6-month follow-up, patients assessed the overall change with a Global Rating of Change Scale. Responsiveness was examined by analyzing the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve and correlations between the change scores. MIC was assessed using the optimal cutoff point at the receiver operating characteristics curve.

Results

Area under the receiver operating characteristics curve estimates were 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91,1.00) for OSS, 0.82 (95% CI 0.66,0.99) for EQ-5D 5-level utility index, 0.73 (95% CI 0.58,0.87) for EQ visual analogue scale, and 0.74 (95% CI 0.58,0.90) for FABQ-PA. MIC were 6.0 points for OSS, 0.024 points for EQ-5D 5-level utility index, 10.0 points for EQ visual analogue scale, and -5.0 points for FABQ-PA.

Conclusion

Responsiveness of the OSS, EQ-5D, and FABQ-PA was sufficient to measure improvement after arthroscopic decompression surgery.

Efficacy of Adjuvant Application of Platelet-Rich Plasma After Needle Aspiration of Calcific Deposits for the Treatment of Rotator Cuff Calcific Tendinitis: A Double-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial With 2-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Needle aspiration of calcific deposits (NACD) is a frequently used treatment for rotator cuff calcific tendinitis (RCCT). However, a substantial number of patients experience recurrent or persisting shoulder symptoms after NACD.

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of adjuvant application of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) after NACD (NACP+PRP) with those of conventional NACD with corticosteroids (NACD+corticosteroids) on pain, shoulder function, and quality of life (QoL).

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

In a single-center, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial, 80 adults with symptomatic RCCT were randomly allocated to receive NACD+corticosteroids or NACD+PRP. Pain, shoulder function, and QoL were assessed at baseline; 6 weeks; and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after treatment using a numeric rating scale for pain (NRS); the Constant-Murley score (CMS); the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH); the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS); and the EuroQol 5-dimension scale (EQ-5D). Additionally, resorption of calcific deposits and the integrity of rotator cuff tendons were assessed by using standard radiographs and ultrasound examination, respectively. The results were analyzed using noninferiority analysis for NRS scores and a mixed model for repeated measures.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were included (48 female; mean age, 49 ± 6 years; 41 patients in the NACD+PRP group). Both groups showed improvement of clinical scores at the 2-year follow-up (P < .001 for all clinical scores). NACD+PRP was found to be noninferior to NACD+corticosteroids with regard to the mean decrease of NRS scores (4.34 vs 3.56; P = .003). Mixed-model analysis showed a significant difference in favor of NACD+PRP (CMS, P < .001; DASH, P = .002; OSS, P = .010; EQ-5D, P < .001). However, clinically relevant differences in favor of NACD+PRP were only seen at the 6-month follow-up for NRS and CMS scores, whereas at the 6-week follow-up a clinically relevant difference in favor of NACD+corticosteroids was found for all clinical scores except for the NRS. Full resorption of calcific deposits was present in 84% of the NACD+PRP group compared with 66% in the NACD+corticosteroids group (P = .081). In the NACD+PRP group, 10 (24%) patients required a second NACD procedure compared with 19 (49%) patients in the NACD+corticosteroids group (P = .036). Six complications, of which 5 were frozen shoulders, occurred in the NACD+PRP group compared with 1 complication in the NACD+corticosteroids group (P = .11).

CONCLUSION

NACD+PRP resulted in worse clinical scores at the 6-week follow-up but better clinical scores at the 6-month follow-up compared with NACD+corticosteroids. At the 1- and 2-year follow-ups, the results were comparable between groups. Furthermore, PRP seemed to reduce the need for additional treatments but was associated with more complications. In conclusion, NACD+corticosteroids had a favorable early effect on pain and function combined with low comorbidity. Thus, it remains the treatment of choice for patients with RCCT.

REGISTRATION

NCT02173743 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Validity, responsiveness and minimal important change of the EQ-5D-5L in patients after rotator cuff repair, shoulder arthroplasty or thumb carpometacarpal arthroplasty

PURPOSE

The aim was to investigate the measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L utility index in patients after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR), total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or thumb carpometacarpal (CMC I) arthroplasty.

METHODS

In this prospective study, all patients completed the EQ-5D-5L before surgery and 6 months and 1 year after surgery. In addition, RCR patients completed the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), TSA patients completed the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and CMC I patients completed the brief Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (brief MHQ) at each designated time point. Construct validity (Pearson's correlation coefficient, r), responsiveness (effect size), minimal important difference (MID), minimal important change (MIC), and floor and ceiling effects of the EQ-5D-5L were determined. To test discriminative ability, EQ-5D-5L utility indices of patients who were in a patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) or not at follow-up were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

We included 153 RCR, 150 TSA, and 151 CMC I patients. The EQ-5D-5L utility index correlated with the OSS (r = 0.73), SPADI (r = - 0.65) and brief MHQ (r = 0.61). The effect sizes were 1.3 (RCR and CMC I group) and 1.1 (TSA). The MID and MIC ranged from 0.027 to 0.209. Ceiling effects were found. The EQ-5D-5L utility index differed significantly between patients being in a PASS versus patients who were not in a PASS.

CONCLUSION

The EQ-5D-5L utility index shows good construct validity, responsiveness and discriminative ability in patients after arthroscopic RCR, TSA and CMC I arthroplasty and is suitable to quantify quality of life.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This auxiliary analysis is part of a primary study that was originally registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01954433) on October 1, 2013.