| 1. |
- Burmester, Gerd, et al.
(författare)
-
The appropriate use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in rheumatic disease: opinions of a multidisciplinary European expert panel
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 70:5, s. 818-822
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction Given the safety issues of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) and the robustness of guidelines, making treatment choices in daily clinical practice is increasingly difficult. This study aimed systematically to analyse the opinions of a multidisciplinary European expert panel on the appropriateness of different NSAID, with or without the use of a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), in individual patients with chronic rheumatic disease. Methods Using the Research and Development/University of California at Los Angeles appropriateness method, the appropriateness of five (non-)selective NSAID with or without a PPI was assessed for 144 hypothetical patient profiles, ie, unique combinations of cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risk factors. Appropriateness statements were calculated for all indications. Results All options without PPI were considered appropriate in patients with no gastrointestinal/cardiovascular risk factors. Cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitors (C2SI) alone and non-selective NSAID plus PPI were preferred for patients with elevated gastrointestinal risk and low cardiovascular risk. Naproxen plus PPI was favoured in patients with high cardiovascular risk. For the combination of high gastrointestinal/high cardiovascular risk the use of any NSAID was discouraged; if needed, naproxen plus PPI or a C2SI plus PPI could be considered. Discussion The panel results may support treatment considerations at the level of individual patients, according to their gastrointestinal/cardiovascular risk profile.
|
|
| 2. |
- Stoevelaar, Herman, et al.
(författare)
-
Personalised versus non-individualised case-based CME: A randomised pilot study.
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of European CME. - : Informa UK Limited. - 2161-4083. ; 11:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The PinPoint Case Platform (PPCP) offers independent online case-based CME. To align with personal learning needs, a functionality of needs assessments ("QuickScan") was developed, directing users to follow personalised case journeys. A randomised study was conducted, comparing its effectiveness, time efficiency and user experience with a format of non-individualised case-based learning. Forty-two residents in urology from five European countries were randomly assigned to follow non-individualised case-based learning (control group) or a needs assessment plus personalised case journeys on different topics in prostate cancer. After performing a pre- and post-assessment, both groups showed a similar increase in test scores (Mann-Whitney U =247; p =.113), but the time needed for completing the learning exercise was significantly lower in the group with the personalised approach (median: 45 vs 90minutes; Mann-Whitney U =97.5; p =.0141). The quality of the two learning methods was similarly well received by both groups. In conclusion, learners who followed personalised case journeys learned similarly effective but more time efficient than non-individualised case-based learners. Future studies should determine if these findings can be extrapolated to board-certified physicians following CME activities.
|
|
| 3. |
- Tronnier, Volker M., et al.
(författare)
-
The appropriate management of persisting pain after spine surgery : a European panel study with recommendations based on the RAND/UCLA method
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European spine journal. - : Springer. - 0940-6719 .- 1432-0932. ; 28:1, s. 31-45
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: Management of patients with persisting pain after spine surgery (PPSS) shows significant variability, and there is limited evidence from clinical studies to support treatment choice in daily practice. This study aimed to develop patient-specific recommendations on the management of PPSS.Methods: Using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method (RUAM), an international panel of 6 neurosurgeons, 6 pain specialists, and 6 orthopaedic surgeons assessed the appropriateness of 4 treatment options (conservative, minimally invasive, neurostimulation, and re-operation) for 210 clinical scenarios. These scenarios were unique combinations of patient characteristics considered relevant to treatment choice. Appropriateness had to be expressed on a 9-point scale (1 = extremely inappropriate, 9 = extremely appropriate). A treatment was considered appropriate if the median score was ≥ 7 in the absence of disagreement (≥ 1/3 of ratings in each of the opposite sections 1–3 and 7–9).Results: Appropriateness outcomes showed clear and specific patterns. In 48% of the scenarios, exclusively one of the 4 treatments was appropriate. Conservative treatment was usually considered appropriate for patients without clear anatomic abnormalities and for those with new pain differing from the original symptoms. Neurostimulation was considered appropriate in the case of (predominant) neuropathic leg pain in the absence of conditions that may require surgical intervention. Re-operation could be considered for patients with recurrent disc, spinal/foraminal stenosis, or spinal instability.Conclusions: Using the RUAM, an international multidisciplinary panel established criteria for appropriate treatment choice in patients with PPSS. These may be helpful to educate physicians and to improve consistency and quality of care.
|
|
