Development of a simple standardized scoring system for assessing large vessel vasculitis by 18F-FDG PET-CT and differentiation from atherosclerosis.

PURPOSE: This study is to develop a structured approach to distinguishing large-artery vasculitis from atherosclerosis using 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography combined with low-dose computed tomography (FDG PET/CT). METHODS: FDG PET/CT images of 60 patients were evaluated, 30 having biopsy-proven giant cell arteritis (GCA; the most common form of large-artery vasculitis), and 30 with severe atherosclerosis. Images were evaluated by 12 nuclear medicine physicians using 5 criteria: FDG uptake pattern (intensity, distribution, circularity), the degree of calcification, and co-localization of calcifications with FDG-uptake. Criteria that passed agreement, and reliability tests were subsequently analysed for accuracy using receiver operator curve (ROC) analyses. Criteria that showed discriminative ability were then combined in a multi-component scoring system. Both initial and final 'gestalt' conclusion were also reported by observers before and after detailed examination of the images. RESULTS: Agreement and reliability analyses disqualified 3 of the 5 criteria, leaving only FDG uptake intensity compared to liver uptake and arterial wall calcification for potential use in a scoring system. ROC analysis showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.90 (95%CI 0.87-0.92) for FDG uptake intensity. Degree of calcification showed poor discriminative ability on its own (AUC of 0.62; 95%CI 0.58-0.66). When combining presence of calcification with FDG uptake intensity into a 6-tiered scoring system, the AUC remained similar at 0.91 (95%CI 0.88-0.93). After exclusion of cases with arterial prostheses, the AUC increased to 0.93 (95%CI 0.91-0.95). The accuracy of the 'gestalt' conclusion was initially 89% (95%CI 86-91%) and increased to 93% (95%CI 91-95%) after detailed image examination. CONCLUSION: Standardised assessment of arterial wall FDG uptake intensity, preferably combined with assessment of arterial calcifications into a scoring method, enables accurate, but not perfect, distinction between large artery vasculitis and atherosclerosis.

Baseline PET radiomics outperforms the IPI risk score for prediction of outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

The objective of this study is to externally validate the clinical positron emission tomography (PET) model developed in the HOVON-84 trial and to compare the model performance of our clinical PET model using the international prognostic index (IPI). In total, 1195 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) were included in the study. Data of 887 patients from 6 studies were used as external validation data sets. The primary outcomes were 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) and 2-year time to progression (TTP). The metabolic tumor volume (MTV), maximum distance between the largest lesion and another lesion (Dmaxbulk), and peak standardized uptake value (SUVpeak) were extracted. The predictive values of the IPI and clinical PET model (MTV, Dmaxbulk, SUVpeak, performance status, and age) were tested. Model performance was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC), and diagnostic performance, using the positive predictive value (PPV). The IPI yielded an AUC of 0.62. The clinical PET model yielded a significantly higher AUC of 0.71 (P < .001). Patients with high-risk IPI had a 2-year PFS of 61.4% vs 51.9% for those with high-risk clinical PET, with an increase in PPV from 35.5% to 49.1%, respectively. A total of 66.4% of patients with high-risk IPI were free from progression or relapse vs 55.5% of patients with high-risk clinical PET scores, with an increased PPV from 33.7% to 44.6%, respectively. The clinical PET model remained predictive of outcome in 6 independent first-line DLBCL studies, and had higher model performance than the currently used IPI in all studies.

From qualitative data to a measurement instrument: A clarification and elaboration of choices made in the development of the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) 3.0.

PURPOSE: To clarify and elaborate on the choices that were made in the development of the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale 3.0 (POSAS 3.0), based upon the rich information obtained from patients during focus groups and pilot tests. METHODS: The discussions described in this paper are a reflection of the focus group study and pilot tests that were conducted in order to develop the Patient Scale of the POSAS3.0. The focus groups took place in the Netherlands and Australia and included 45 participants. Pilot tests were performed with 15 participants in Australia, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. RESULTS: We discussed the selection, wording and merging of 17 included items. Additionally, the reason for exclusion of 23 characteristics are given. CONCLUSION: Based upon the unique and rich material of patient input obtained, two versions of the Patient Scale of the POSAS3.0 were developed: the Generic version, and the Linear scar version. The discussions and decisions taken during the development are informative for a good understanding of the POSAS 3.0 and are indispensable as a background for future translations and cross-cultural adaptations.

A clinimetric assessment of the validity and reliability of 3D technology for scar surface area measurement.

INTRODUCTION: The quality of scars has become an important outcome of burn care. Objective scar assessment through scar surface area measurement enables quantification of scar formation and evaluation of treatment efficacy. 3D technology has proven valid and reliable but often remains cumbersome, expensive, and time-consuming. 3D technology with depth sensors on mobile devices has become available and might surpass these limitations. This study provides a clinimetric assessment of the validity and reliability of a 3D system with a depth sensor for scar surface area measurement. METHODS: A technology involving a depth sensor mounted on a mobile device was used. Images and analyses were made with a custom-made software application. A standardized one-keyframe image capturing procedure was followed. To assess validity, stickers with predefined dimensions (8.01 cm2 - 77.70 cm2) were imaged in a single observer setting on various body parts of healthy volunteers. To assess reliability, hypertrophic scars, keloids, and normotrophic scars were imaged and rated by two observers independently. Data are expressed as mean (+/-SD), Coefficient of Variation (CV), Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC), and Limits of Agreements (LoA). RESULTS: Eighty stickers placed on 20 healthy volunteers showed validity with CV between 0.62%- 1.67% for observer A and 0.75%- 1.19% for observer B. For the reliability study, 69 scars on 36 patients were included. Mean scar surface area ranged from 0.83 cm2 to 155.59 cm2. Mean scar surface area measurement was 13.83 cm2 (SD 23.06) for observer A and 13.59 cm2 (SD 23.31) for observer B. Adjusted interobserver CV for trained observers is estimated as 5.59%, with corresponding LoA = 0 ± 0.15 x mean surface area. Interobserver ICCs were 0.99-1.00. CONCLUSION: This 3D technology with a depth sensor for measuring scar surface area provides valid and reliable data and thereby surpasses expensive and time-consuming 3D cameras.

Development of the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) 3.0: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is widely used for measurements of scar quality. This encompasses visual, tactile and sensory characteristics of the scar. The Patient Scale of previous POSAS versions was lacking input from patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop the POSAS3.0, Patient Scale with involvement of adults patients with all scar types, complying with the highest clinimetric standards. METHODS: From February 2018 to April 2019, a series of six focus group interviews were performed in the Netherlands and Australia to identify scar quality characteristics that adults with scars consider to be important. All focus groups were transcribed, anonymized and analysed using a thematic analysis. Relevant characteristics were formulated into items, resulting in a Dutch and English version of the Patient Scale. These drafts were pilot tested in Australia, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, and refined accordingly. RESULTS: A total of 21 relevant scar quality characteristics were identified during the focus groups. Two distinct versions of the POSAS3.0, Patient Scale were developed. The Generic version contains 16 items and can be used for all scar types, except linear scars. The Linear Scar version of the Patient Scale contains the same 16 items, with an extra item referring to the widening of scar margins. All included items are rated on a verbal rating scale with five response options. CONCLUSION: Two versions of the POSAS3.0 Patient Scale were developed. Further field tests are being performed to establish the measurement properties and scoring algorithm of the scales.

Field-Testing the Euro-MCD Instrument: Important Outcomes According to Participants Before and After Moral Case Deliberation.

Ethics support services like Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) intend to support healthcare professionals in ethically difficult situations. To assess outcomes of MCD, the Euro-MCD Instrument has been developed. Field studies to test this instrument are needed and have been conducted, examining important outcomes before MCD participation and experienced outcomes. The current study aimed to (1) describe how participants' perceive the importance of MCD outcomes after MCD; (2) compare these perceptions with those before MCD participation; and (3) test the factor structure of these outcomes. Swedish, Norwegian and Dutch healthcare professionals rated the importance of outcomes in the Euro-MCD Instrument after four and eight MCDs. Ratings were compared with those before MCD participation using paired and independent samples t-tests. The factor structure was tested using exploratory factor analyses. After 4 and 8 MCDs, 443 respectively 247 respondents completed the instrument. More than 69% rated all MCD outcomes as 'quite' or 'very' important, especially outcomes from Enhanced Collaboration, Improved Moral Reflexivity and Improved Moral Attitude. Significant differences for 16 outcomes regarding ratings before and after MCD participation were not considered meaningful. Factor analyses suggested three categories, which seemingly resemble the domains Improved Moral Reflexivity, Enhanced Collaboration and a combination of Improved Moral Attitude and Enhanced Emotional Support. After participation in MCDs, respondents confirmed the importance of outcomes in the Euro-MCD Instrument. The question on perceived importance and the categorization of outcomes need reconsideration. The revised instrument will be presented elsewhere, based on all field studies and theoretical reflections.

Aberrant patterns of PET response during treatment for DLBCL patients with MYC gene rearrangements.

PURPOSE: MYC gene rearrangements in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients are associated with poor prognosis. Our aim was to compare patterns of 2[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography computed tomography (PET/CT) response in MYC + and MYC- DLBCL patients. METHODS: Interim PET/CT (I-PET) and end of treatment PET/CT (EoT-PET) scans of 81 MYC + and 129 MYC- DLBCL patients from 2 HOVON trials were reviewed using the Deauville 5-point scale (DS). DS1-3 was regarded as negative and DS4-5 as positive. Standardized uptake values (SUV) and metabolic tumor volume (MTV) were quantified at baseline, I-PET, and EoT-PET. Negative (NPV) and positive predictive values (PPV) were calculated using 2-year overall survival. RESULTS: MYC + DLBCL patients had significantly more positive EoT-PET scans than MYC- patients (32.5 vs 15.7%, p = 0.004). I-PET positivity rates were comparable (28.8 vs 23.8%). In MYC + patients 23.2% of the I-PET negative patients converted to positive at EoT-PET, vs only 2% for the MYC- patients (p = 0.002). Nine (34.6%) MYC + DLBCL showed initially uninvolved localizations at EoT-PET, compared to one (5.3%) MYC- patient. A total of 80.8% of EoT-PET positive MYC + patients showed both increased lesional SUV and MTV compared to I-PET. In MYC- patients, 31.6% showed increased SUV and 42.1% showed increased MTV. NPV of I-PET and EoT-PET was high for both MYC subgroups (81.8-94.1%). PPV was highest at EoT-PET for MYC + patients (61.5%). CONCLUSION: MYC + DLBCL patients demonstrate aberrant PET response patterns compared to MYC- patients with more frequent progression during treatment after I-PET negative assessment and new lesions at sites that were not initially involved. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION: HOVON-84: EudraCT: 2006-005,174-42, retrospectively registered 01-08-2008. HOVON-130: EudraCT: 2014-002,654-39, registered 26-01-2015.

Optimal timing and criteria of interim PET in DLBCL: a comparative study of 1692 patients.

Interim 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (Interim-18F-FDG-PET, hereafter I-PET) has the potential to guide treatment of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) if the prognostic value is known. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal timing and response criteria for evaluating prognosis with I-PET in DLBCL. Individual patient data from 1692 patients with de novo DLBCL were combined and scans were harmonized. I-PET was performed at various time points during treatment with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) therapy. Scans were interpreted using the Deauville score (DS) and change in maximum standardized uptake value (ΔSUVmax). Multilevel Cox proportional hazards models corrected for International Prognostic Index (IPI) score were used to study the effects of timing and response criteria on 2-year progression-free survival (PFS). I-PET after 2 cycles (I-PET2) and I-PET4 significantly discriminated good responders from poor responders, with the highest hazard ratios (HRs) for I-PET4. Multivariable HRs for a PET-positive result at I-PET2 and I-PET4 were 1.71 and 2.95 using DS4-5, 4.91 and 6.20 using DS5, and 2.93 and 4.65 using ΔSUVmax, respectively. ΔSUVmax identified a larger proportion of poor responders than DS5 did. For all criteria, the negative predictive value was >80%, and positive predictive values ranged from 30% to 70% at I-PET2 and I-PET4. Unlike I-PET1, I-PET3 discriminated good responders from poor responders using DS4-5 and DS5 thresholds (HRs, 2.94 and 4.67, respectively). I-PET2 and I-PET4 predict good response equally during R-CHOP therapy in DLBCL. Optimal timing and response criteria depend on the clinical context. Good response at I-PET2 is suggested for de-escalation trials, and poor response using ΔSUVmax at I-PET4 is suggested for randomized trials that are evaluating new therapies.

The Submental Nasal Appearance Scale for the Assessment of Repaired Unilateral Complete Cleft Lip: A Validation Study.

OBJECTIVE: To reassess reliability and validity of the Submental Nasal Appearance Scale (SNAS) compared to the preliminary pilot study, for assessment of patient photographs with repaired unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). When utilizing the SNAS, 3 nasal features (1. nasal outline; 2. alar base position; 3. nostril axis) must be graded according to symmetry between the cleft and noncleft side using a 5-point scale with reference photographs for each feature. The mean score calculated from the graded features reflects the overall degree of nasal symmetry, which is considered an important goal when repairing UCLP. DESIGN: Fifty patient photographs were selected and cropped, displaying the submental view. Six raters assessed these photographs using the SNAS and a separate 5-point scale to assess the overall submental appearance. Interrater reliability was determined for both methods and correlation was calculated between these as an indication of construct validity. SETTING: Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. PATIENTS: Six- to 9-year-old patients with repaired UCLP. RESULTS: Interrater reliability of 0.73 and 0.48 was found for the SNAS and overall appearance assessment, respectively, while in the pilot study values of 0.79 and 0.69 were found. Correlation of 0.59 and 0.74 was found in the current and pilot study, respectively, between the SNAS and overall appearance assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The SNAS is a reliable tool to assess nasal symmetry from the submental perspective. Reliability of the SNAS is higher compared to grading overall appearance, but validity of the SNAS was less well supported.

COSMIN Risk of Bias tool to assess the quality of studies on reliability or measurement error of outcome measurement instruments: a Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Scores on an outcome measurement instrument depend on the type and settings of the instrument used, how instructions are given to patients, how professionals administer and score the instrument, etc. The impact of all these sources of variation on scores can be assessed in studies on reliability and measurement error, if properly designed and analyzed. The aim of this study was to develop standards to assess the quality of studies on reliability and measurement error of clinician-reported outcome measurement instruments, performance-based outcome measurement instrument, and laboratory values. METHODS: We conducted a 3-round Delphi study involving 52 panelists. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on how a comprehensive research question can be deduced from the design of a reliability study to determine how the results of a study inform us about the quality of the outcome measurement instrument at issue. Consensus was reached on components of outcome measurement instruments, i.e. the potential sources of variation. Next, we reached consensus on standards on design requirements (n = 5), standards on preferred statistical methods for reliability (n = 3) and measurement error (n = 2), and their ratings on a four-point scale. There was one term for a component and one rating of one standard on which no consensus was reached, and therefore required a decision by the steering committee. CONCLUSION: We developed a tool that enables researchers with and without thorough knowledge on measurement properties to assess the quality of a study on reliability and measurement error of outcome measurement instruments.

Moral competence, moral teamwork and moral action - the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes (Euro-MCD) Instrument 2.0 and its revision process.

BACKGROUND: Clinical Ethics Support (CES) services are offered to support healthcare professionals in dealing with ethically difficult situations. Evaluation of CES is important to understand if it is indeed a supportive service in order to inform and improve future implementation of CES. Yet, methods to measure outcomes of CES are scarce. In 2014, the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes Instrument (Euro-MCD) was developed to measure outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD). To further validate the instrument, we tested it in field studies and revised it. This paper presents the Euro-MCD 2.0 and describes the revision process. METHODS: The revision process comprised an iterative dialogue among the authors as Euro-MCD-project team, including empirical findings from six Euro-MCD field-studies and input from European experts in CES and theory. Empirical findings contained perceptions and experiences of MCD outcomes among healthcare professionals who participated in MCDs in various settings in Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands. Theoretical viewpoints on CES, literature on goals of CES and MCD and ethics theory guided the interpretation of the empirical findings and final selection of MCD outcomes. RESULTS: The Euro-MCD 2.0 Instrument includes three domains: Moral Competence, Moral Teamwork and Moral Action. Moral Competence consists of items about moral sensitivity, analytical skills and virtuous attitude. Moral Teamwork includes open dialogue and supportive relationships and Moral Action refers to moral decision-making and responsible care. During the revision process, we made decisions about adding and reformulating items as well as decreasing the number from 26 to 15 items. We also altered the sentence structure of items to assess the current status of outcomes (e.g. 'now') instead of an assumed improvement over time (e.g. 'better') and we omitted the question about perceived importance. CONCLUSIONS: The Euro-MCD 2.0 is shorter, less complex and more strongly substantiated by an integration of empirical findings, theoretical reflections and dialogues with participants and experts. Use of the Euro-MCD 2.0 will facilitate evaluation of MCD and can thereby monitor and foster implementation and quality of MCD. The Euro-MCD 2.0 will strengthen future research on evaluation of outcomes of MCD.

Can the Combined Use of Two Screening Instruments Improve the Predictive Power of Dependency in (Instrumental) Activities of Daily Living, Mortality and Hospitalization in Old Age?

BACKGROUND: Due to differences in the definition of frailty, many different screening instruments have been developed. However, the predictive validity of these instruments among community-dwelling older people remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether combined (i.e. sequential or parallel) use of available frailty instruments improves the predictive power of dependency in (instrumental) activities of daily living ((I)ADL), mortality and hospitalization. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective cohort study with two-year follow-up was conducted among pre-frail and frail community-dwelling older people in the Netherlands. MEASUREMENTS: Four combinations of two highly specific frailty instruments (Frailty Phenotype, Frailty Index) and two highly sensitive instruments (Tilburg Frailty Indicator, Groningen Frailty Indicator) were investigated. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for all single instruments as well as for the four combinations, sequential and parallel. RESULTS: 2,420 individuals participated (mean age 76.3 ± 6.6 years, 60.5% female) in our study. Sequential use increased the levels of specificity, as expected, whereas the PPV hardly increased. Parallel use increased the levels of sensitivity, although the NPV hardly increased. CONCLUSIONS: Applying two frailty instruments sequential or parallel might not be a solution for achieving better predictions of frailty in community-dwelling older people. Our results show that the combination of different screening instruments does not improve predictive validity. However, as this is one of the first studies to investigate the combined use of screening instruments, we recommend further exploration of other combinations of instruments among other study populations.

High and Intensive Care in Psychiatry: Validating the HIC Monitor as a Tool for Assessing the Quality of Psychiatric Intensive Care Units.

This study aims to validate the HIC monitor as a model-fidelity scale to the High and Intensive Care (HIC) model, a recently developed model for acute psychiatric wards. To assess the psychometric properties of the HIC monitor, 37 audits were held on closed inpatient wards at 20 psychiatric hospitals in the Netherlands. Interrater reliability, construct validity and content validity were examined. Our results suggest that the HIC monitor has good psychometric properties. It can be used as a tool for assessing the implementation of the HIC model on acute psychiatric wards in the Netherlands, and for quality assessment and improvement.

Validation of two PROMIS item banks for measuring social participation in the Dutch general population.

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) item banks 'Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities' (35 items) and 'Satisfaction with Social Roles and Activities' (44 items) were developed to measure (satisfaction with) participation more efficiently and precisely than current instruments, by using Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT). We validated these item banks in a Dutch general population. METHODS: Participants in an internet panel completed both item banks. Unidimensionality, local dependence, monotonicity, Graded Response Model item fit, Differential Item Functioning (DIF) for age, gender, education, region, ethnicity, and language (Dutch compared to US Social Supplement), and reliability were assessed. RESULTS: A representative Dutch sample of 1002 people participated. We found for the Ability to Participate and Satisfaction with Participation item banks, respectively, sufficient unidimensionality (CFI: 0.971, 0.960; TLI: 0.970, 0.958; RMSEA: 0.108, 0.108), no local dependence, sufficient monotonicity (H: 0.75, 0.73), good item fit (2 out of 35 items, 1 out of 44 items with S-X2p-value < 0.001). No DIF was found. We found a reliability of at least 0.90 with simulated CATs in 86% and 94% of the participants with on average 4.7 (range 2-12) and 4.3 (range 3-12) items, respectively. DISCUSSION: The PROMIS participation item banks showed sufficient psychometric properties in a general Dutch population and can be used as CAT. PROMIS CATs allow reliable and valid measurement of participation in an efficient and user-friendly way with limited administration time.

Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty with or without tonsillectomy in the treatment of adult obstructive sleep apnea - A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The most commonly performed surgical procedure for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is uvulopalatopharyngoplasty with or without tonsillectomy (UPPP ± TE). However, there is currently no review solely focusing on clinically relevant effects of standard UPPP technique with or without tonsillectomy as a monotherapy in patients with OSA. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the effects of isolated UPPP ± TE in patients with OSA. Studies of any design referring to adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea diagnosed via polysomnography or comparable objective measures were considered, in which isolated "standard" UPPP ± TE was performed. RESULTS: Forty-eight studies were included for the qualitative analysis. All but one study demonstrated a reduction in the frequency of respiratory events and success/response rates ranged from 35 to 95.2%. In the six studies that reported pre- and postoperative mean scores of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), a reduction in sleepiness scores was demonstrated. Data addressing the effect of UPPP ± TE in comparison to no treatment or control were available from two randomized controlled trials (RCT). When pooling the data, UPPP ± TE was significantly more effective in reducing the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) (large effect): an AHI mean difference (MD) of -18.59 (95% CI -34.14, -3.04) and an ESS MD of -5.37 (95% CI -7,03, -3.72). Data addressing effect of UPPP ± TE in comparison to baseline was available from three RCT. When pooling the data, the AHI was reduced from a mean 35.4 to 17.9 (49.5% reduction); a MD of -20.41, 95% CI -32.78, -8.04 (-1.80, -1.15) (large effect). Various additional beneficial effects of UPPP ± TE were demonstrated including improvement in sexual function, ventricular function, sleep stages, serum lipid, depressive disorder and driving performance. CONCLUSION: UPPP ± TE reduces respiratory events and daytime sleepiness in adult patients with OSA and UPPP ± TE is superior to non-treated controls in this regard. Further research is needed to establish the long-term benefit, the impact on cardiovascular morbidity and the role of UPPP ± TE in the variety of available treatment options for OSA.

Reliability of the Animated Activity Questionnaire for assessing activity limitations of patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine the internal consistency, test-retest reliability and measurement error of the Animated Activity Questionnaire (AAQ) for assessing activity limitations in hip and knee osteoarthritis (HKOA) patients. METHODS: A total of 1,177 patients, from six countries (the Netherlands, UK, France, Denmark, Italy and Spain), completed the AAQ, a questionnaire consisting of videos displaying 17 activities with 3-5 levels of performance, from which patients choose the video that best matches their own performance. Unidimensionality was assessed by means of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), using the following fit indices: the Tucker-Lewis index (TFI) >0.95, comparative fit index (CFI) >0.95, and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) <0.06. Cronbach's alpha was computed. In 238 patients who completed the AAQ twice, the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated for test-retest reliability. The standard error of measurement (SEM) and the smallest detectable change (SDC) were calculated as parameters of measurement error. RESULTS: The fit indices for unidimensionality were CFI 0.957, TLI 0.950, and RMSEA 0.144. Cronbach's alpha was 0.95. ICC for test-retest reliability was 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.91 to 0.95), ranging from 0.85 to 0.98 across countries. SEM and SDC were 4.9 and 13.6, respectively, on a scale from 0 to 100, and ranging from 2.7 to 6.7, and from 7.5 to 18.4, respectively, across countries. The AAQ appeared to measure slightly more precisely in patients with knee problems and patients without prosthesis. CONCLUSION: The AAQ seemed to be unidimensional, and showed good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The SDC indicated that changes in scores of at least 14% indicate real improvement in activity limitations.

COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Content validity is the most important measurement property of a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) and the most challenging to assess. Our aims were to: (1) develop standards for evaluating the quality of PROM development; (2) update the original COSMIN standards for assessing the quality of content validity studies of PROMs; (3) develop criteria for what constitutes good content validity of PROMs, and (4) develop a rating system for summarizing the evidence on a PROM's content validity and grading the quality of the evidence in systematic reviews of PROMs. METHODS: An online 4-round Delphi study was performed among 159 experts from 21 countries. Panelists rated the degree to which they (dis)agreed to proposed standards, criteria, and rating issues on 5-point rating scales ('strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree'), and provided arguments for their ratings. RESULTS: Discussion focused on sample size requirements, recording and field notes, transcribing cognitive interviews, and data coding. After four rounds, the required 67% consensus was reached on all standards, criteria, and rating issues. After pilot-testing, the steering committee made some final changes. Ten criteria for good content validity were defined regarding item relevance, appropriateness of response options and recall period, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of the PROM. DISCUSSION: The consensus-based COSMIN methodology for content validity is more detailed, standardized, and transparent than earlier published guidelines, including the previous COSMIN standards. This methodology can contribute to the selection and use of high-quality PROMs in research and clinical practice.

COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures.

PURPOSE: Systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) differ from reviews of interventions and diagnostic test accuracy studies and are complex. In fact, conducting a review of one or more PROMs comprises of multiple reviews (i.e., one review for each measurement property of each PROM). In the absence of guidance specifically designed for reviews on measurement properties, our aim was to develop a guideline for conducting systematic reviews of PROMs. METHODS: Based on literature reviews and expert opinions, and in concordance with existing guidelines, the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) steering committee developed a guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs. RESULTS: A consecutive ten-step procedure for conducting a systematic review of PROMs is proposed. Steps 1-4 concern preparing and performing the literature search, and selecting relevant studies. Steps 5-8 concern the evaluation of the quality of the eligible studies, the measurement properties, and the interpretability and feasibility aspects. Steps 9 and 10 concern formulating recommendations and reporting the systematic review. CONCLUSIONS: The COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs includes methodology to combine the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties with the quality of the PROM itself (i.e., its measurement properties). This enables reviewers to draw transparent conclusions and making evidence-based recommendations on the quality of PROMs, and supports the evidence-based selection of PROMs for use in research and in clinical practice.

Long-term trajectories of patients with neck pain and low back pain presenting to chiropractic care: A latent class growth analysis.

BACKGROUND: Information on the course of neck pain (NP) and low back pain (LBP) typically relies on data collected at few time intervals during a period of up to 1 year. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentre practice-based cohort study, patients consulting a chiropractor responded weekly for 52 weeks to text messages on their cell phones. Data from 448 patients (153 NP, 295 LBP) who had returned at least one set of answers in the first 26 weeks were used. Outcome measures were pain intensity (VAS) and functional outcome, assessed using four different questions: pain intensity, limitation in activities of daily living (ADL), number of days with pain in the previous week and number of days limited in ADL. Distinct patterns of pain were analysed with quadratic latent class growth analysis. RESULTS: The final model was a 4-class model for NP and LBP. The 'recovering from mild baseline pain' is most common (76.3% of NP patients/58.3% of LBP patients) followed by the 'recovering from severe baseline pain' class (16.3% NP/29.8% LBP). They follow similar trajectories when considered over a period of 6 months. Pain at baseline, duration of complaints, functional status, limitations in ADL and the score on psychosocial scales were the variables that most contributed to distinguish between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with NP or LBP presenting in chiropractic care show a trajectory of symptoms characterized by persistent or fluctuating pain of low or medium intensity. Only a minority either experience a rapid complete recovery or develop chronic severe pain. SIGNIFICANCE: Ninety percentage of patients with neck pain or low back pain presenting to chiropractors have a 30% improvement within 6 weeks and then show a trajectory of symptoms characterized by persistent or fluctuating pain of low or medium intensity. Only a minority either experience a rapid complete recovery or develop chronic severe pain.

The Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale for 18-Year-Old Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients: A Tool for Nasolabial Aesthetics Assessment.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a reliable and easy-to-use method to assess the nasolabial appearance of 18-year-old patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (CLP). DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of nasolabial aesthetics using a 5-point ordinal scale and newly developed photographic reference scale: the Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale (CARS). Three cleft surgeons and 20 medical students scored the nasolabial appearance on standardized frontal photographs. SETTING: VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam. PATIENTS: Inclusion criteria: 18-year-old patients, unilateral cleft lip and palate, available photograph of the frontal view. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: history of facial trauma, congenital syndromes affecting facial appearance. Eighty photographs were available for scoring. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the CARS for 18-year-old patients when used by cleft surgeons and medical students. RESULTS: The interobserver reliability for the nose and lip together was 0.64 for the cleft surgeons and 0.61 for the medical students. There was an intraobserver reliability of 0.75 and 0.78 from the surgeons and students, respectively, on the nose and lip together. No significant difference was found between the cleft surgeons and medical students in the way they scored the nose ( P = 0.22) and lip ( P = 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: The Cleft Aesthetic Rating Scale for 18-year-old patients has a substantial overall estimated reliability when the average score is taken from three or more cleft surgeons or medical students assessing the nasolabial aesthetics of CLP patients.