minimally important difference

最小重要差异
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:对最小重要差异(MID)的估计可以帮助解释使用患者报告结果(PRO)收集的数据,但是在卫生技术评估(HTA)指南中对MID的强调存在差异。本研究旨在确定常用PRO的MID信息在多大程度上,EQ-5D,是选定的HTA机构所需要和使用的。
    方法:来自英国HTA机构的技术评估(TA)文件,法国,德国,对2019年至2021年的美国进行了审查,以确定讨论EQ-5D数据MID作为临床结果评估(COA)终点的文件。
    结果:在151个使用EQ-5D作为COA终点的TA中,58(38%)讨论了EQ-5D数据的MID。MID的讨论在德国最为频繁,在Gesundheitswesen的GemeinsamerBundesausschuss(G-BA)的75%(n=12/16)和质量研究所的44%(n=34/78),(IQWiG)TA。MID主要应用于EQ-VAS(n=50),最常使用>7或>10点的阈值(n=13)。G-BA和IQWiG经常批评MID分析,特别是EQ-VAS的MID阈值的来源,因为他们被认为不适合评估MID的有效性。
    结论:EQ-5D的MID在德国以外并不经常被讨论,这似乎并没有对这些HTA机构的决策产生负面影响。虽然MID阈值通常应用于德国TA的EQ-VAS数据,由于担心分析的有效性,在获益评估中经常被拒绝.公司应预先指定统计分析计划中的连续数据分析,以考虑在德国进行治疗效益评估。
    OBJECTIVE: Estimates of minimally important differences (MID) can assist interpretation of data collected using patient-reported outcomes (PRO), but variability exists in the emphasis placed on MIDs in health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines. This study aimed to identify to what extent information on the MID of a commonly used PRO, the EQ-5D, is required and utilised by selected HTA agencies.
    METHODS: Technology appraisal (TA) documents from HTA agencies in England, France, Germany, and the US between 2019 and 2021 were reviewed to identify documents which discussed MID of EQ-5D data as a clinical outcome assessment (COA) endpoint.
    RESULTS: Of 151 TAs utilising EQ-5D as a COA endpoint, 58 (38%) discussed MID of EQ-5D data. Discussion of MID was most frequent in Germany, in 75% (n = 12/16) of Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss (G-BA) and 44% (n = 34/78) of Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen, (IQWiG) TAs. MID was predominantly applied to the EQ-VAS (n = 50), most frequently using a threshold of > 7 or > 10 points (n = 13). G-BA and IQWiG frequently criticised MID analyses, particularly the sources of MID thresholds for the EQ-VAS, as they were perceived as being unsuitable for assessing the validity of MID.
    CONCLUSIONS: MID of the EQ-5D was not frequently discussed outside of Germany, and this did not appear to negatively impact decision-making of these HTA agencies. While MID thresholds were often applied to EQ-VAS data in German TAs, analyses were frequently rejected in benefit assessments due to concerns with their validity. Companies should pre-specify analyses of continuous data in statistical analysis plans to be considered for treatment benefit assessment in Germany.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:使用个体参与者数据荟萃分析(IPDMA)来估计老年抑郁量表-15(GDS-15)的最小可检测变化(MDC),并根据参与者特征和研究水平变量检查MDC是否存在差异。
    方法:这是对来自IPDMA的GDS抑郁筛查准确性数据的二次分析。如果以任何语言发表的研究数据集包括60岁或以上参与者的GDS-15分数,则符合本研究的条件。GDS-15的MDC是通过随机效应荟萃分析使用2.77(MDC95)和1.41(MDC67)标准测量误差(SEM)估算的。亚组分析用于评估参与者年龄和性别的MDC差异。进行元回归以评估基于研究水平变量的差异,包括平均年龄,比例男性,患有重度抑郁症的比例,和招聘设置。
    结果:5,876名参与者(平均年龄76岁,40%男性,包括21项研究中的11%患有重度抑郁症)。MDC95为3.81点(95%置信区间[CI]3.59,4.04),MDC67为1.95(95%CI1.83,2.03)。≥80岁和<80岁之间的MDC95差异为0.26分(95%CI0.04,0.48);女性和男性的MDC95相似(0.05,95%CI-0.12,0.22)。患重度抑郁症的参与者比例每增加10%,MDC95增加0.29分(95%CI0.17,0.41);平均年龄有较小的关联(0.04分,95%CI0.00至0.09)与MDC95,但性别和招募设置无显著相关性。
    结论:MDC95为3.81分,MDC67为1.95分。MDC95随着重度抑郁症患者比例的增加而增加。结果可用于评估抑郁症状的个体变化,并作为评估最小临床重要差异估计值的阈值。
    OBJECTIVE: To use individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) to estimate the minimal detectable change (MDC) of the Geriatric Depression Scale-15 (GDS-15) and to examine whether MDC may differ based on participant characteristics and study-level variables.
    METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of data from an IPDMA on the depression screening accuracy of the GDS. Datasets from studies published in any language were eligible for the present study if they included GDS-15 scores for participants aged 60 or older. MDC of the GDS-15 was estimated via random-effects meta-analysis using 2.77 (MDC95) and 1.41 (MDC67) standard errors of measurement. Subgroup analyses were used to evaluate differences in MDC by participant age and sex. Meta-regression was conducted to assess for differences based on study-level variables, including mean age, proportion male, proportion with major depression, and recruitment setting.
    RESULTS: 5876 participants (mean age 76 years, 40% male, 11% with major depression) from 21 studies were included. The MDC95 was 3.81 points (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.59, 4.04), and MDC67 was 1.95 (95% CI 1.83, 2.03). The difference in MDC95 was 0.26 points (95% CI 0.04, 0.48) between ≥80-year-olds and <80-year-olds; MDC95 was similar for females and males (0.05, 95% CI -0.12, 0.22). The MDC95 increased by 0.29 points (95% CI 0.17, 0.41) per 10% increase in proportion of participants with major depression; mean age had a small association (0.04 points, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.09) with MDC95, but sex and recruitment setting were not significantly associated.
    CONCLUSIONS: The MDC95 was 3.81 points and MDC67 was 1.95 points. MDC95 increased with the proportion of participants with major depression. Results can be used to evaluate individual changes in depression symptoms and as a threshold for assessing minimal clinical important difference estimates.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:先前存在的1型糖尿病是妊娠妇女的压力状况。我们旨在评估1型糖尿病妇女在怀孕期间与健康相关的生活质量(HRQoL),并检查HRQoL与妊娠结局之间的关系。
    方法:这项多中心前瞻性队列研究涉及来自中国11个参与中心的115名1型糖尿病孕妇。使用欧洲生活质量5维5级问卷(EQ-5D-5L)调查了三个三个月的HRQoL。采用中国时间权衡值法计算EQ-5D-5L得分。采用多因素logistic回归模型评价HRQoL对母婴结局的影响。采用接收器工作特征曲线和基于分布的方法来估计HRQoL临床重要下降的最小重要差异。
    结果:50.43%的1型糖尿病患者报告妊娠期HRQoL受损。从妊娠早期到中期,估计的产妇HRQoL显着降低(妊娠早期平均EQ-5D-5L评分为0.97,妊娠中期为0.91),妊娠晚期略有改善(平均EQ-5D-5L评分为0.95)。多变量回归模型显示,妊娠期HRQoL受损的女性患高血压的风险较高,早产,和复合妊娠结局。复合妊娠结局的估计最小重要差异为-0.045至-0.043。
    结论:1型糖尿病妇女在怀孕期间经历HRQoL受损与高血压疾病和早产风险较高相关。EQ-5D-5L的估计最小重要差异可能作为产前护理的临床重要工具。
    背景:No.ChiCTR1900025955。
    OBJECTIVE: Preexisting type 1 diabetes is a stressful situation for women in pregnancy. We aimed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) during pregnancy in women with type 1 diabetes and examine the association between HRQoL and pregnancy outcomes.
    METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study involved 115 pregnant women with type 1 diabetes from 11 participating centers in China. HRQoL was investigated in three trimesters using European Quality-of-life 5-Dimension 5-Level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5 L). Chinese time trade-off value method was used to calculate the EQ-5D-5 L score. Multivariable logistic regression model was used to evaluate the effect of HRQoL on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic curves and distribution-based methods were employed to estimate minimally important differences of clinically important decline in HRQoL.
    RESULTS: 50.43% of the studied women with type 1 diabetes reported impaired HRQoL in pregnancy. Estimated maternal HRQoL significantly decreased from early to mid-pregnancy (mean EQ-5D-5 L score 0.97 in the first trimester and 0.91 in the second trimester) and improved slightly in late pregnancy (mean EQ-5D-5 L score 0.95). Multivariable regression model showed that women who experienced impaired HRQoL in pregnancy had higher risk of hypertensive disorder, preterm birth, and composite pregnancy outcome. The estimated minimally important difference for composite pregnancy outcome was -0.045 to -0.043.
    CONCLUSIONS: Experiencing impaired HRQoL during pregnancy was associated with a higher risk of hypertensive disorder and preterm birth in women with type 1 diabetes. The estimated minimally important difference of EQ-5D-5 L might serve as a clinically important tool in prenatal care.
    BACKGROUND: No.ChiCTR1900025955.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    WOUND-Q是一种模块化的患者报告结果测量(PROM),具有13个量表,可测量4个领域的构建体(即,伤口特征,健康相关的生活质量,护理和伤口治疗的经验)。先前对WOUND-Q的心理测量学进行了评估,这13个量表证明了良好的有效性和可靠性。然而,响应性(即,检测临床变化的能力)的WOUND-Q尚未评估。这项研究的目的是评估9种评估结果的WOUND-Q量表的反应性,在18岁或以上患有慢性伤口且存在至少3个月的人的样本中。这项研究对421名参与者进行了为期4个月的随访,这些参与者完成了WOUND-Q作为先前心理测量研究的一部分。参与者完成了一项在线调查,回答了有关他们当前伤口状态的问题(例如,number,type,尺寸,气味,排水),锚定关于变化的问题,以及他们在初始评估中完成的WOUND-Q量表。用75%的接受阈值测试了预定义的假设,表明有足够的反应性证据。还使用基于锚的方法和基于分布的方法来计算最小重要差异(MID)。在390名受邀参与者中,320人提供了答复,年龄从19岁到84岁不等。假设的接受度从60%到100%不等,只有症状量表不符合75%的阈值。这项研究的结果提供了证据,表明WOUND-Q可以有效地测量慢性伤口患者的临床变化。
    The WOUND-Q is a modular patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) with 13 scales measuring constructs across 4 domains (i.e., wound characteristics, health related quality of life, experience of care and wound treatment). The psychometrics of the WOUND-Q were previously assessed and the 13 scales evidenced good validity and reliability. However, the responsiveness (i.e., ability to detect clinical change) of the WOUND-Q has yet to be assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate responsiveness for 9 WOUND-Q scales that assess outcomes, in a sample of people 18 years of age or older with chronic wounds that were present for at least 3 months. This study conducted a 4 month follow-up of 421 participants who completed the WOUND-Q as part of a previous psychometric study. Participants completed an online survey answering questions about their current wound state (e.g., number, type, size, smell, drainage), anchor questions about change, as well as the WOUND-Q scales that they had completed in their initial assessment. Pre-defined hypotheses were tested with a 75% acceptance threshold indicating sufficient evidence of responsiveness. Minimally important differences (MIDs) were also calculated using both anchor-based and distribution-based methods. Of 390 invited participants, 320 provided responses, ranging in age from 19 to 84 years. Acceptance of hypotheses ranged from 60% to 100%, with only the Symptom scale not meeting the 75% threshold. The findings of this study provide evidence that the WOUND-Q can validly measure clinical change in patients with chronic wounds.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:哮喘损害和风险问卷(AIRQ)是10项,是/否,同等权重的控制工具。较低的分数表明更好的控制。七个损害项目反映了之前2周的症状,和三个风险项目评估前12个月的恶化。在年度评估之间使用的后续AIRQ对恶化项目有3个月的召回期。
    目的:评估AIRQ随时间的反应性,并确定最小的重要差异(MID)。
    方法:AIRQ纵向研究数据来自年龄≥12岁的哮喘患者。基于锚的方法评估了AIRQ评分相对于患者总体变化印象(PGIC)的差异,圣乔治呼吸问卷(SGRQ)和哮喘控制测试(ACT)的认可MID,和恶化发生超过12个月。基线和12个月的数据反映了12个月的召回AIRQ分数;随访AIRQ分数用于3,6-,和9个月的分析。
    结果:纳入1070例患者。PGIC“大大改善”与AIRQ平均评分从基线到3、6、9和12个月的变化相关,分别为-2.0、-1.9、-1.9和-1.8。在6个月和12个月时,符合SGRQMID(≥4分下降)的患者的平均AIRQ评分变化为-1.8。在第3、6、9和12个月,符合ACTMID的患者的AIRQ平均评分从基线下降-2.2至-2.5分(≥3分)。基线AIRQ评分较高2分与12个月恶化发生率的1.7比值比相关(95%CI1.53-1.89)。
    结论:AIRQMID的变化分数为2。
    BACKGROUND: The Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire (AIRQ) is a 10-item, yes/no, equally weighted control tool. Lower scores indicate better control. Moreover, 7 impairment items reflect previous 2-week symptoms, and 3 risk items assess previous 12-month exacerbations. The Follow-up AIRQ for use between annual assessments has a 3-month recall period for exacerbation items.
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the responsiveness of the AIRQ over time and identify a minimal important difference (MID).
    METHODS: The AIRQ longitudinal study data were analyzed from patients with asthma aged 12 years and older. Anchor-based methods assessed differences in AIRQ scores relative to Patient Global Impression of Change, the accepted MIDs for St. George\'s Respiratory Questionnaire and Asthma Control Test, and exacerbation occurrence over 12 months. Baseline and 12-month data reflected 12-month recall AIRQ scores; Follow-up AIRQ scores were used for 3-, 6-, and 9-month analyses.
    RESULTS: A total of 1070 patients were included. The Patient Global Impression of Change rating of \"much improved\" was associated with AIRQ mean score changes from baseline to months 3, 6, 9, and 12 of -2.0, -1.9, -1.9, and -1.8, respectively. The mean AIRQ score change among patients who met the St. George\'s Respiratory Questionnaire MID (≥4-point decrease) was -1.8 at 6 and 12 months. The AIRQ mean scores decreased from baseline by -2.2 to -2.5 points at months 3, 6, 9, and 12 for patients who met the Asthma Control Test MID (≥ 3-point increase). A 2-point higher baseline AIRQ score was associated with a 1.7 odds ratio of 12-month exacerbation occurrence (95% CI, 1.53-1.89).
    CONCLUSIONS: A change score of 2 is recommended as the AIRQ MID.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:我们使用患者报告的结果(PRO)指标测量了自我报告的健康状况和直肠脱垂手术症状的变化。
    方法:在温哥华进行直肠脱垂修复的前瞻性招募队列患者,2013年至2021年,加拿大在手术前和手术后6个月进行了调查:EuroQol五维仪器(EQ-5D-5L),广义焦虑症量表(GAD-7),疼痛强度,干扰享受生活和一般活动(PEG),患者健康问卷(PHQ-9),大便失禁严重程度指数(FISI),胃肠道生活质量指数(GIQLI),和大便失禁生活质量量表(FIQL)。
    结果:我们包括46名报告健康状况改善的参与者(EQ-5D-5L;p<0.01),疼痛干扰(PEG;p<0.01),抑郁症状(PHQ-9;p=0.01),大便失禁严重程度(FISI;p<0.01),胃肠道生活质量(GIQLI;p<0.01),与生活方式相关的大便失禁生活质量(FIQL)(p=0.02),应对和行为(p=0.02)和抑郁和自我感知(p=0.01)。
    结论:直肠脱垂的手术修复改善了患者的生活质量,改善了大便失禁的严重程度和疼痛,和症状干扰日常活动。
    BACKGROUND: We measured changes in self-reported health and symptoms attributable to rectal prolapse surgery using patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures.
    METHODS: A prospectively recruited cohort of patients scheduled for rectal prolapse repair in Vancouver, Canada between 2013 and 2021 were surveyed before and 6-months after surgery using seven PROs: the EuroQol Five-Dimension Instrument (EQ-5D-5L), Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7), Pain Intensity, Interference with Enjoyment of Life and General Activity (PEG), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI), Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI), and the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale (FIQL).
    RESULTS: We included 46 participants who reported improvements in health status (EQ-5D-5L; p ​< ​0.01), pain interference (PEG; p ​< ​0.01), depressive symptoms (PHQ-9; p ​= ​0.01), fecal incontinence severity (FISI; p ​< ​0.01), gastrointestinal quality of life (GIQLI; p ​< ​0.01), and fecal incontinence quality of life (FIQL) related to lifestyle (p ​= ​0.02), coping and behaviour (p ​= ​0.02) and depression and self-perception (p ​= ​0.01).
    CONCLUSIONS: Surgical repair of rectal prolapse improved patients\' quality of life with meaningful improvements in fecal incontinence severity and pain, and symptom interference with daily activities.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    尽管全膝关节置换术(TKA)的总体患病率和成功率,相当一部分患者对其结果不满意.
    评估TKA术后患者的2种患者报告结局指标(PROM)-膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分-关节置换(KOOS-JR)和患者报告结局测量信息系统Global-10(PROMIS10)-的反应性并确定最小重要差异(MID)。
    队列研究(诊断);证据水平,3.
    包括从2015年8月至2019年8月接受TKA并完成基线和术后KOOS-JR和PROMIS10调查的患者。PROMIS10包括两个领域:身体健康和心理健康。可靠变化指数(RCI)和MID的估计,使用基于锚和基于分布的方法,对每个PROM进行了计算。回归模型用于确定患者和临床因素是否预测MID阈值或MID成就。
    共纳入1315例患者。基于分布的MID,使用各种方法从基线分数计算,KOOS-JR的范围从19.3到31,RCI为4.38。在这些病人中,293(22.3%)表现出轻微或中度改善,并且该队列包括在基于锚的MID的计算中。在3个月和1年的随访中,基于锚的MID分别为16.9和24.3,分别,66%的患者在12个月时达到了MID。术前PROM评分较高,男性,非白人种族,和当前的吸烟者状态预示着术后1年KOOS-JR未能达到基于锚的MID(P<0.05)。较高的术前PROM评分和任何90天的不良事件预示了基于锚的MID的重要变化的较低阈值。较高的基线PROM分数,年龄较小,男性,非白人种族,高等美国麻醉医师学会分类,术前使用麻醉剂,不吸烟,且住院时间延长均与KOOS-JR或PROMIS10分量表达到MID的几率较低相关.
    研究结果证明了解释KOOS-JR和PROMIS10的相关值。虽然患者人口统计学无法准确预测哪些患者会达到MID,确定了一些预测TKA后患者报告结局成功的潜在因素.
    UNASSIGNED: Despite the overall prevalence and success of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), a significant portion of patients are dissatisfied with their outcomes.
    UNASSIGNED: To assess the responsiveness and determine the minimally important difference (MID) of 2 patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)-the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global-10 (PROMIS 10)-in patients after TKA.
    UNASSIGNED: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.
    UNASSIGNED: Included were patients who underwent TKA from August 2015 through August 2019 and completed baseline and postoperative KOOS-JR and PROMIS 10 surveys. The PROMIS 10 consists of 2 domains: physical health and mental health. Estimates for the reliable change index (RCI) and MID, using anchor-based and distribution-based methods, were calculated for each PROM. Regression modeling was used to determine whether patient and clinical factors predicted MID thresholds or MID achievement.
    UNASSIGNED: A total of 1315 patients were included. Distribution-based MIDs, calculated using various methods from baseline scores, ranged from 19.3 to 31 for the KOOS-JR, and the RCI was 4.38. Of these patients, 293 (22.3%) demonstrated small or moderate improvement, and this cohort was included in the calculation of anchor-based MIDs. The anchor-based MIDs were 16.9 and 24.3 at 3-month and 1-year follow-up, respectively, and 66% of patients achieved the MID at 12 months. Higher preoperative PROM score, male sex, non-White race, and current smoker status were predictive of failing to achieve the anchor-based MID for KOOS-JR at 1 year postoperatively (P < .05). Higher preoperative PROM score and any 90-day adverse event predicted lower thresholds of important change in anchor-based MIDs. Higher baseline PROM scores, younger age, male sex, non-White ethnicity, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, preoperative narcotics use, not smoking, and longer hospital stay were all associated with lower odds of achieving the MID on the KOOS-JR or either of the PROMIS 10 subscales.
    UNASSIGNED: The study results demonstrated relevant values for interpretation of the KOOS-JR and PROMIS 10. While patient demographics did not accurately predict which patients would achieve the MID, some potential factors predicting successful patient-reported outcomes after TKA were identified.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Observational Study
    很少有研究检查在COVID-19大流行期间,创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)症状学在很长一段时间内的变化。这项研究使用纵向队列设计来检查:(1)总体PTSD症状和症状群的变化;(2)变化的调节因素;(3)观察到的变化的临床意义;(4)临床意义变化的相关性。在10个时间点(2018年10月至2022年4月)使用DSM-5(PCL-5)的PTSD清单评估社区成年人(N=1412)。总体PCL-5评分和症状群的变化基本上受到大流行前临床严重程度的影响(即,高于/低于PCL-5截止值)。大流行前非临床参与者的总分增加,群集D(负认知),和集群E(唤醒),而临床升高的参与者表现出整体和所有集群的下降。关于临床意义,12%的大流行前非临床参与者表现出临床意义的增加,4%表现出下降。相反,42%的大流行前升高组表现出临床意义的下降,而6%的人表现出增长。许多社会心理领域的大流行影响与临床意义的变化有关。总的来说,这些发现通过大流行前的严重程度和PTSD症状群揭示了实质上不同的轨迹.大流行前高严重性参与者的很大一部分表现出相当大的下降是一个意想不到的值得注意的观察结果。
    Few studies have examined changes in posttraumatic-stress disorder (PTSD) symptomatology across an extended time period during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study used a longitudinal cohort design to examine: (1) changes in overall PTSD symptoms and symptom clusters; (2) moderators of change; (3) the clinical significance of observed changes; and (4) correlates of clinically meaningful changes. Community adults (N = 1412) were assessed using the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) at 10 timepoints (October 2018 - April 2022). Changes in overall PCL-5 score and symptom clusters were substantially moderated by pre-pandemic clinical severity (i.e., above/below PCL-5 cut-off). Pre-pandemic non-clinical participants exhibited increases in overall scores, Cluster D (negative cognitions), and Cluster E (arousal), while clinically elevated participants exhibited decreases overall and in all clusters. Regarding clinical significance, 12% of pre-pandemic non-clinical participants exhibited clinically meaningful increases, and 4% exhibited decreases. Conversely, 42% of the pre-pandemic elevated group exhibited clinically meaningful decreases, while 6% exhibited increases. Pandemic impacts in numerous psychosocial domains were associated with clinically meaningful change. Collectively, these findings reveal substantively divergent trajectories by pre-pandemic severity and PTSD symptom cluster. The large proportion of pre-pandemic high-severity participants exhibiting sizable decreases was an unexpected notable observation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:雄激素剥夺治疗(ADT)会导致疲劳和性功能障碍。睾酮恢复的时间取决于患者和治疗特异性特征。在接受新辅助ADT和立体定向放疗(SBRT)治疗的男性中,睾丸激素恢复的动力学尚不明确。这项研究旨在表征睾丸激素的恢复,并评估其与患者报告的荷尔蒙和性功能改善的关系。
    方法:机构审查委员会(IRB)批准对前瞻性收集的数据进行回顾性审查。该分析包括在单个机构接受短期ADT(亮丙瑞林3-6个月)和机器人SBRT(五个部分中35-36.25Gy)治疗的所有局限性前列腺癌患者。在放射开始时测量睾酮水平,第一年每三个月,此后每6个月。总睾酮回收率定义为血清水平>230ng/dL。在ADT开始之前,使用扩展前列腺指数综合指数(EPIC)-26记录性功能和激素功能,SBRT的第一天,每次跟进。将EPIC-26子域评分转化为0-100量表,其中较高的评分反映较少的麻烦。
    结果:在2009年1月至2018年5月期间,122名平均年龄为72岁(范围:55-89岁)的男性接受了ADT,然后接受了SBRT。32%(N=39)为黑人,27%[N=39为肥胖(BMI>30)]。SBRT前睾酮水平中位数为15ng/dL(范围:3-89ng/dL)。大约77%(N=94)的患者接受了3个月的ADT。ADT前EPIC-26激素和性域得分中位数分别为94和41。12个月时,71%(N=87)的患者恢复到性腺正常状态,平均恢复时间为SBRT后4个月。ADT后,激素和性子域得分显着下降,但在SBRT后12个月,性子和激素域得分恢复到最低重要差异(MID)范围内。
    结论:在接受亮丙瑞林和SBRT的短期ADT后,大多数患者的睾酮恢复在治疗后一年内迅速发生。生活质量领域的改善与睾酮恢复趋势密切相关。随访预约时的睾酮测试将允许进行预期咨询,这可能会限制与暂时生活质量下降相关的麻烦。
    BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) causes fatigue and sexual dysfunction. The time to testosterone recovery depends on patient and treatment-specific characteristics. The kinetics of testosterone recovery in men treated with neoadjuvant ADT and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is not well established. This study seeks to characterize testosterone recovery and evaluate its relationship with the improvement in patient-reported hormonal and sexual function.
    METHODS: Institutional review board (IRB) approval was obtained for retrospective review of prospectively collected data. All patients with localized prostate cancer treated with short-course ADT (3-6 months of Leuprolide) and robotic SBRT (35-36.25 Gy in five fractions) at a single institution were included in this analysis. Testosterone levels were measured at the start of radiation, every 3 months for the first year, and every 6 months thereafter. Total testosterone recovery was defined as a serum level of >230 ng/dL. Sexual and hormonal function was recorded using the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC)-26 prior to ADT initiation, the first day of SBRT, and at each follow-up. The EPIC-26 subdomain scores were transformed to a 0-100 scale with higher scores reflecting less bother.
    RESULTS: Between January 2009 and May 2018, 122 men with a median age of 72 years (range: 55-89 years) received ADT followed by SBRT. Thirty-two percent (N=39) were black and 27% [N=39 were obese (BMI > 30)]. The median pre-SBRT testosterone level was 15 ng/dL (range: 3-89 ng/dL). Around 77% (N=94) of patients received 3 months of ADT. The median pre-ADT EPIC-26 Hormone and Sexual Domain Scores were 94 and 41, respectively. At 12 months, 71% (N=87) of patients recovered to a eugonadal state with a mean recovery time of 4 months post-SBRT. Hormonal and sexual subdomain scores declined significantly following ADT but recovered to within the minimally important difference (MID) for sexual and hormonal domain scores by 12 months post-SBRT.
    CONCLUSIONS: Testosterone recovery following short-course ADT with leuprolide and SBRT occurs rapidly in the majority of patients within one year after treatment. Quality of life domain improvements followed the testosterone recovery trend closely. Testosterone testing at follow-up appointments would allow for anticipatory counseling that may limit the bother associated with temporary quality of life decrements.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Observational Study
    目标:很少有多波纵向研究检查2019年冠状病毒(COVID-19)大流行期间的心理健康变化。当前的研究检查了:(a)在10波数据收集过程中抑郁和焦虑的总体变化;(b)变化的亚组调节因子;(c)通过最小重要差异(MID)引起的变化的临床严重程度;(d)临床重要变化的相关性。
    方法:使用纵向观察队列设计,从2018年10月至2022年4月,通过PHQ-9和GAD-7评估了1412名非临床成年人(Mage=36;60%女性)的抑郁和焦虑(3大流行前,7次大流行内波;M保留率=92%)。
    结果:抑郁和焦虑表现出明显的大流行内变化,反映了最初的增长,其次是下降。大流行前的严重程度缓和了变化,低严重程度参与者表现出增加,高严重程度参与者表现出无显著变化或减少。对于抑郁和焦虑,分别,10%和11%显示MID增加,而4%和6%的MID表现出下降。严重程度亚组存在分歧模式,最低严重程度组表现出较高的MID发生率增加,而最高严重程度亚组表现出较高的MID发生率降低。
    结论:这些发现阐明了COVID-19大流行期间抑郁和焦虑的周期性,并根据大流行前的严重程度揭示了增加和减少之间的出乎意料的负相关关系。
    Few multi-wave longitudinal studies have examined mental health changes across the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The current study examined: (a) overall changes in depression and anxiety over 10-waves of data collection; (b) subgroup moderators of changes; (c) clinical severity of the changes via minimally important differences (MIDs); and (d) correlates of clinically important changes.
    Using a longitudinal observational cohort design, 1412 non-clinical adults (Mage=36; 60% female) were assessed for depression and anxiety via the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 from October 2018 to April 2022 (3 pre-pandemic, 7 intra-pandemic waves; M retention = 92%).
    Depression and anxiety exhibited significant intra-pandemic changes, reflecting initial increases, followed by decreases. Pre-pandemic severity moderated changes, with low severity participants exhibiting increases and high severity participants exhibiting non-significant change or decreases. For depression and anxiety, respectively, 10% and 11% exhibited MID increases, while 4% and 6% exhibited MID decreases. Divergent patterns were present by severity subgroup, with the lowest severity exhibiting higher rates of MID increases and the highest severity subgroup exhibiting higher rates of MID decreases.
    These findings illuminate the periodicity of depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic and reveal an unexpected inverse relationship between increases and decreases based on pre-pandemic severity.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号