ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIM: The hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign (HMCAS) is a useful clinical sign in the management of acute stroke and may alter time-critical decisions within an emergency setting. Though gold standards have been published, these are rarely used in clinical practice and scans tend to be reported subjectively. It is therefore possible that the level of experience of the doctor reporting the scan may impact on the accuracy of the reporting and hence patient management. This study was designed to evaluate the accuracy in detecting HMCAS across doctors with varying levels of experience. METHODS: Forty doctors were recruited into four categories of experience. Each subject received a brief computer-based tutorial on how to identify an HMCAS and was then asked to report on the presence or absence of an HMCAS in 19 pre-prepared CT scans using a standardised viewing template. RESULTS: The mean (±SE) percentage correct scores increased with experience from 76.8 ± 3.69 among interns and residents to 90.1 ± 2.23 (neurologists and radiologists; p < 0.01). Sensitivity and specificity as well as positive and negative predictive values all increased with experience. In addition, more experienced clinicians were better able to distinguish scans which met the radiological criteria for HMCAS from those which only just failed to do so. CONCLUSIONS: Experienced neurologists and radiologists consistently and accurately reported the presence or absence of HMCAS, whereas less experienced clinicians tended to over-report the presence of HMCAS. This may have implications for the acute management of thromboembolic stroke.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Effective treatment of hip pain improves population health and quality of life. Accurate differential diagnosis is fundamental to effective treatment. The diagnostic criteria for one common hip problem, greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) have not been well defined. PURPOSE: To define the clinical presentation of GTPS. METHODS: Forty-one people with GTPS, 20 with hip osteoarthritis (OA), and 23 age-matched and sex-matched asymptomatic participants (ASC) were recruited. Inclusion and exclusion criteria ensured mutually exclusive groups. ASSESSMENT: the Harris hip score (HHS), a battery of clinical tests, and single leg stance (SLS). Participants identified the site of reproduced pain. ANALYSIS: Fisher's exact test, analysis of variance (ANOVA) informed recursive partitioning to develop two classification trees. RESULTS: Maximum walking distance and the ability to manipulate shoes and socks were the only HHS domains to differentiate GTPS from OA (ANOVA: p=0.010 and <0.001); OR (95% CI) of 3.47 (1.09 to 10.93) and 0.06 (0.00 to 0.26), respectively. The lateral hip pain (LHP) classification tree: (dichotomous LHP associated with a flexion abduction external rotation (FABER) test) had a mean (SE) sensitivity and specificity of 0.81 (0.019) and 0.82 (0.044), respectively. A non-specific hip pain classification tree had a mean (SE) sensitivity and specificity of 0.78 (0.058) and 0.28 (0.080). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with LHP in the absence of difficulty with manipulating shoes and socks, together with pain on palpation of the greater trochanter and LHP with a FABER test are likely to have GTPS.
Subject(s)
Arthralgia/diagnosis , Femur , Osteoarthritis, Hip/complications , Activities of Daily Living , Analysis of Variance , Arthralgia/classification , Arthralgia/etiology , Case-Control Studies , Diagnosis, Differential , Exercise Test , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Syndrome , Walking/physiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cases of impaired renal function have been reported in patients who had been treated with both zoledronic acid and thalidomide for myeloma. Hence, we conducted a safety study of zoledronic acid and thalidomide in myeloma patients participating in a trial of maintenance therapy. METHODS: Twenty-four patients who were enrolled in a large randomized trial of thalidomide vs no thalidomide maintenance therapy for myeloma, in which all patients also received zoledronic acid, were recruited to a pharmacokinetic and renal safety sub-study, and followed for up to 16 months. RESULTS: No significant differences by Wilcoxon rank-sum statistic were found in zoledronic acid pharmacokinetics or renal safety for up to 16 months in patients randomized to thalidomide or not. CONCLUSION: In myeloma patients receiving maintenance therapy, the combination of zoledronic acid and thalidomide appears to confer no additional renal safety risks over zoledronic acid alone.
