1
|
Goodacre S, Sutton L, Ennis K, Thomas B, Hawksworth O, Iftikhar K, Croft SJ, Fuller G, Waterhouse S, Hind D, Stevenson M, Bradburn MJ, Smyth M, Perkins GD, Millins M, Rosser A, Dickson J, Wilson M. Prehospital early warning scores for adults with suspected sepsis: the PHEWS observational cohort and decision-analytic modelling study. Health Technol Assess 2024; 28:1-93. [PMID: 38551135 PMCID: PMC11017155 DOI: 10.3310/ndty2403] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/02/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Guidelines for sepsis recommend treating those at highest risk within 1 hour. The emergency care system can only achieve this if sepsis is recognised and prioritised. Ambulance services can use prehospital early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to prioritise patients for treatment or early assessment in the emergency department. Objectives To determine the accuracy, impact and cost-effectiveness of using early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to identify sepsis requiring urgent treatment. Design Retrospective diagnostic cohort study and decision-analytic modelling of operational consequences and cost-effectiveness. Setting Two ambulance services and four acute hospitals in England. Participants Adults transported to hospital by emergency ambulance, excluding episodes with injury, mental health problems, cardiac arrest, direct transfer to specialist services, or no vital signs recorded. Interventions Twenty-one early warning scores used alongside paramedic diagnostic impression, categorised as sepsis, infection, non-specific presentation, or other specific presentation. Main outcome measures Proportion of cases prioritised at the four hospitals; diagnostic accuracy for the sepsis-3 definition of sepsis and receiving urgent treatment (primary reference standard); daily number of cases with and without sepsis prioritised at a large and a small hospital; the minimum treatment effect associated with prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective, compared to no prioritisation, assuming willingness to pay £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Results Data from 95,022 episodes involving 71,204 patients across four hospitals showed that most early warning scores operating at their pre-specified thresholds would prioritise more than 10% of cases when applied to non-specific attendances or all attendances. Data from 12,870 episodes at one hospital identified 348 (2.7%) with the primary reference standard. The National Early Warning Score, version 2 (NEWS2), had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve when applied only to patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection (0.756, 95% confidence interval 0.729 to 0.783) or sepsis alone (0.655, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.68). None of the strategies provided high sensitivity (> 0.8) with acceptable positive predictive value (> 0.15). NEWS2 provided combinations of sensitivity and specificity that were similar or superior to all other early warning scores. Applying NEWS2 to paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection with thresholds of > 4, > 6 and > 8 respectively provided sensitivities and positive predictive values (95% confidence interval) of 0.522 (0.469 to 0.574) and 0.216 (0.189 to 0.245), 0.447 (0.395 to 0.499) and 0.274 (0.239 to 0.313), and 0.314 (0.268 to 0.365) and 0.333 (confidence interval 0.284 to 0.386). The mortality relative risk reduction from prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective exceeded 0.975 for all strategies analysed. Limitations We estimated accuracy using a sample of older patients at one hospital. Reliable evidence was not available to estimate the effectiveness of prioritisation in the decision-analytic modelling. Conclusions No strategy is ideal but using NEWS2, in patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of infection or sepsis could identify one-third to half of sepsis cases without prioritising unmanageable numbers. No other score provided clearly superior accuracy to NEWS2. Research is needed to develop better definition, diagnosis and treatments for sepsis. Study registration This study is registered as Research Registry (reference: researchregistry5268). Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/136/10) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 16. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steve Goodacre
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
- Emergency Department, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Laura Sutton
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Kate Ennis
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Ben Thomas
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Olivia Hawksworth
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - Susan J Croft
- Emergency Department, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Gordon Fuller
- Emergency Department, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Simon Waterhouse
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Daniel Hind
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Matt Stevenson
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Mike J Bradburn
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Michael Smyth
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Gavin D Perkins
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Mark Millins
- Yorkshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust, Wakefield, UK
| | - Andy Rosser
- West Midlands Ambulance Service University NHS Foundation Trust, Midlands, UK
| | - Jon Dickson
- Academic Unit of Primary Medical Care, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Matthew Wilson
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Brunt AM, Haviland JS, Wheatley DA, Sydenham MA, Bloomfield DJ, Chan C, Cleator S, Coles CE, Donovan E, Fleming H, Glynn D, Goodman A, Griffin S, Hopwood P, Kirby AM, Kirwan CC, Nabi Z, Patel J, Sawyer E, Somaiah N, Syndikus I, Venables K, Yarnold JR, Bliss JM. One versus three weeks hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy for early breast cancer treatment: the FAST-Forward phase III RCT. Health Technol Assess 2023; 27:1-176. [PMID: 37991196 PMCID: PMC11017153 DOI: 10.3310/wwbf1044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2023] Open
Abstract
Background FAST-Forward aimed to identify a 5-fraction schedule of adjuvant radiotherapy delivered in 1 week that was non-inferior in terms of local cancer control and as safe as the standard 15-fraction regimen after primary surgery for early breast cancer. Published acute toxicity and 5-year results are presented here with other aspects of the trial. Design Multicentre phase III non-inferiority trial. Patients with invasive carcinoma of the breast (pT1-3pN0-1M0) after breast conservation surgery or mastectomy randomised (1 : 1 : 1) to 40 Gy in 15 fractions (3 weeks), 27 Gy or 26 Gy in 5 fractions (1 week) whole breast/chest wall (Main Trial). Primary endpoint was ipsilateral breast tumour relapse; assuming 2% 5-year incidence for 40 Gy, non-inferiority pre-defined as < 1.6% excess for 5-fraction schedules (critical hazard ratio = 1.81). Normal tissue effects were assessed independently by clinicians, patients and photographs. Sub-studies Two acute skin toxicity sub-studies were undertaken to confirm safety of the test schedules. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients with grade ≥ 3 acute breast skin toxicity at any time from the start of radiotherapy to 4 weeks after completion. Nodal Sub-Study patients had breast/chest wall plus axillary radiotherapy testing the same three schedules, reduced to the 40 and 26 Gy groups on amendment, with the primary endpoint of 5-year patient-reported arm/hand swelling. Limitations A sequential hypofractionated or simultaneous integrated boost has not been studied. Participants Ninety-seven UK centres recruited 4096 patients (1361:40 Gy, 1367:27 Gy, 1368:26 Gy) into the Main Trial from November 2011 to June 2014. The Nodal Sub-Study recruited an additional 469 patients from 50 UK centres. One hundred and ninety and 162 Main Trial patients were included in the acute toxicity sub-studies. Results Acute toxicity sub-studies evaluable patients: (1) acute grade 3 Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity reported in 40 Gy/15 fractions 6/44 (13.6%); 27 Gy/5 fractions 5/51 (9.8%); 26 Gy/5 fractions 3/52 (5.8%). (2) Grade 3 common toxicity criteria for adverse effects toxicity reported for one patient. At 71-month median follow-up in the Main Trial, 79 ipsilateral breast tumour relapse events (40 Gy: 31, 27 Gy: 27, 26 Gy: 21); hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) versus 40 Gy were 27 Gy: 0.86 (0.51 to 1.44), 26 Gy: 0.67 (0.38 to 1.16). With 2.1% (1.4 to 3.1) 5-year incidence ipsilateral breast tumour relapse after 40 Gy, estimated absolute differences versus 40 Gy (non-inferiority test) were -0.3% (-1.0-0.9) for 27 Gy (p = 0.0022) and -0.7% (-1.3-0.3) for 26 Gy (p = 0.00019). Five-year prevalence of any clinician-assessed moderate/marked breast normal tissue effects was 40 Gy: 98/986 (9.9%), 27 Gy: 155/1005 (15.4%), 26 Gy: 121/1020 (11.9%). Across all clinician assessments from 1 to 5 years, odds ratios versus 40 Gy were 1.55 (1.32 to 1.83; p < 0.0001) for 27 Gy and 1.12 (0.94-1.34; p = 0.20) for 26 Gy. Patient and photographic assessments showed higher normal tissue effects risk for 27 Gy versus 40 Gy but not for 26 Gy. Nodal Sub-Study reported no arm/hand swelling in 80% and 77% in 40 Gy and 26 Gy at baseline, and 73% and 76% at 24 months. The prevalence of moderate/marked arm/hand swelling at 24 months was 10% versus 7% for 40 Gy compared with 26 Gy. Interpretation Five-year local tumour incidence and normal tissue effects prevalence show 26 Gy in 5 fractions in 1 week is a safe and effective alternative to 40 Gy in 15 fractions for patients prescribed adjuvant local radiotherapy after primary surgery for early-stage breast cancer. Future work Ten-year Main Trial follow-up is essential. Inclusion in hypofractionation meta-analysis ongoing. A future hypofractionated boost trial is strongly supported. Trial registration FAST-Forward was sponsored by The Institute of Cancer Research and was registered as ISRCTN19906132. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 09/01/47) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 25. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adrian Murray Brunt
- School of Medicine, University of Keele and University Hospitals of North Midlands, Staffordshire, UK
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU), The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Joanne S Haviland
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU), The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Duncan A Wheatley
- Department of Oncology, Royal Cornwall Hospital NHS Trust, Truro, UK
| | - Mark A Sydenham
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU), The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - David J Bloomfield
- Sussex Cancer Centre, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals, Brighton, UK
| | - Charlie Chan
- Women's Health Clinic, Nuffield Health Cheltenham Hospital, Cheltenham, UK
| | - Suzy Cleator
- Department of Oncology, Imperial Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Ellen Donovan
- Centre for Vision, Speech and Signal Processing, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - Helen Fleming
- Clinical and Translational Radiotherapy Research Group, National Cancer Research Institute, London, UK
| | - David Glynn
- Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK
| | | | - Susan Griffin
- Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK
| | - Penelope Hopwood
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU), The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Anna M Kirby
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK and Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Cliona C Kirwan
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Zohal Nabi
- RTQQA, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Middlesex, UK
| | - Jaymini Patel
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU), The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Elinor Sawyer
- Comprehensive Cancer Centre, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Navita Somaiah
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK and Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Isabel Syndikus
- Clatterbridge Cancer Centre, Clatterbridge Hospital NHS Trust, Cheshire, UK
| | | | - John R Yarnold
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK and Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Judith M Bliss
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU), The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Taylor AH, Thompson TP, Streeter A, Chynoweth J, Snowsill T, Ingram W, Ussher M, Aveyard P, Murray RL, Harris T, Green C, Horrell J, Callaghan L, Greaves CJ, Price L, Cartwright L, Wilks J, Campbell S, Preece D, Creanor S. Motivational support intervention to reduce smoking and increase physical activity in smokers not ready to quit: the TARS RCT. Health Technol Assess 2023; 27:1-277. [PMID: 37022933 PMCID: PMC10150295 DOI: 10.3310/kltg1447] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Physical activity can support smoking cessation for smokers wanting to quit, but there have been no studies on supporting smokers wanting only to reduce. More broadly, the effect of motivational support for such smokers is unclear. Objectives The objectives were to determine if motivational support to increase physical activity and reduce smoking for smokers not wanting to immediately quit helps reduce smoking and increase abstinence and physical activity, and to determine if this intervention is cost-effective. Design This was a multicentred, two-arm, parallel-group, randomised (1 : 1) controlled superiority trial with accompanying trial-based and model-based economic evaluations, and a process evaluation. Setting and participants Participants from health and other community settings in four English cities received either the intervention (n = 457) or usual support (n = 458). Intervention The intervention consisted of up to eight face-to-face or telephone behavioural support sessions to reduce smoking and increase physical activity. Main outcome measures The main outcome measures were carbon monoxide-verified 6- and 12-month floating prolonged abstinence (primary outcome), self-reported number of cigarettes smoked per day, number of quit attempts and carbon monoxide-verified abstinence at 3 and 9 months. Furthermore, self-reported (3 and 9 months) and accelerometer-recorded (3 months) physical activity data were gathered. Process items, intervention costs and cost-effectiveness were also assessed. Results The average age of the sample was 49.8 years, and participants were predominantly from areas with socioeconomic deprivation and were moderately heavy smokers. The intervention was delivered with good fidelity. Few participants achieved carbon monoxide-verified 6-month prolonged abstinence [nine (2.0%) in the intervention group and four (0.9%) in the control group; adjusted odds ratio 2.30 (95% confidence interval 0.70 to 7.56)] or 12-month prolonged abstinence [six (1.3%) in the intervention group and one (0.2%) in the control group; adjusted odds ratio 6.33 (95% confidence interval 0.76 to 53.10)]. At 3 months, the intervention participants smoked fewer cigarettes than the control participants (21.1 vs. 26.8 per day). Intervention participants were more likely to reduce cigarettes by ≥ 50% by 3 months [18.9% vs. 10.5%; adjusted odds ratio 1.98 (95% confidence interval 1.35 to 2.90] and 9 months [14.4% vs. 10.0%; adjusted odds ratio 1.52 (95% confidence interval 1.01 to 2.29)], and reported more moderate-to-vigorous physical activity at 3 months [adjusted weekly mean difference of 81.61 minutes (95% confidence interval 28.75 to 134.47 minutes)], but not at 9 months. Increased physical activity did not mediate intervention effects on smoking. The intervention positively influenced most smoking and physical activity beliefs, with some intervention effects mediating changes in smoking and physical activity outcomes. The average intervention cost was estimated to be £239.18 per person, with an overall additional cost of £173.50 (95% confidence interval -£353.82 to £513.77) when considering intervention and health-care costs. The 1.1% absolute between-group difference in carbon monoxide-verified 6-month prolonged abstinence provided a small gain in lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (0.006), and a minimal saving in lifetime health-care costs (net saving £236). Conclusions There was no evidence that behavioural support for smoking reduction and increased physical activity led to meaningful increases in prolonged abstinence among smokers with no immediate plans to quit smoking. The intervention is not cost-effective. Limitations Prolonged abstinence rates were much lower than expected, meaning that the trial was underpowered to provide confidence that the intervention doubled prolonged abstinence. Future work Further research should explore the effects of the present intervention to support smokers who want to reduce prior to quitting, and/or extend the support available for prolonged reduction and abstinence. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN47776579. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adrian H Taylor
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Tom P Thompson
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Adam Streeter
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Jade Chynoweth
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Tristan Snowsill
- University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Wendy Ingram
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Michael Ussher
- Institute for Social Marketing and Health, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK
| | - Paul Aveyard
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Rachael L Murray
- Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Tess Harris
- Population Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London, UK
| | - Colin Green
- University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jane Horrell
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Lynne Callaghan
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Colin J Greaves
- School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Lisa Price
- Sport and Health Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Lucy Cartwright
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Jonny Wilks
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Sarah Campbell
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Dan Preece
- Public Health, Plymouth City Council, Plymouth, UK
| | - Siobhan Creanor
- Faculty of Health, Peninsula Medical School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Daniels J, Middleton LJ, Cheed V, McKinnon W, Rana D, Sirkeci F, Manyonda I, Belli AM, Lumsden MA, Moss J, Wu O, McPherson K. Uterine artery embolisation versus myomectomy for premenopausal women with uterine fibroids wishing to avoid hysterectomy: the FEMME RCT. Health Technol Assess 2022; 26:1-74. [PMID: 35435818 DOI: 10.3310/zdeg6110] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Uterine fibroids are the most common tumour in women of reproductive age and are associated with heavy menstrual bleeding, abdominal discomfort, subfertility and reduced quality of life. For women wishing to retain their uterus and who do not respond to medical treatment, myomectomy and uterine artery embolisation are therapeutic options. OBJECTIVES We examined the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of uterine artery embolisation compared with myomectomy in the treatment of symptomatic fibroids. DESIGN A multicentre, open, randomised trial with a parallel economic evaluation. SETTING Twenty-nine UK hospitals. PARTICIPANTS Premenopausal women who had symptomatic uterine fibroids amenable to myomectomy or uterine artery embolisation were recruited. Women were excluded if they had significant adenomyosis, any malignancy or pelvic inflammatory disease or if they had already had a previous open myomectomy or uterine artery embolisation. INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomised to myomectomy or embolisation in a 1 : 1 ratio using a minimisation algorithm. Myomectomy could be open abdominal, laparoscopic or hysteroscopic. Embolisation of the uterine arteries was performed under fluoroscopic guidance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was the Uterine Fibroid Symptom Quality of Life questionnaire (with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and a higher score indicating better quality of life) at 2 years, adjusted for baseline score. The economic evaluation estimated quality-adjusted life-years (derived from EuroQol-5 Dimensions, three-level version, and costs from the NHS perspective). RESULTS A total of 254 women were randomised - 127 to myomectomy (105 underwent myomectomy) and 127 to uterine artery embolisation (98 underwent embolisation). Information on the primary outcome at 2 years was available for 81% (n = 206) of women. Primary outcome scores at 2 years were 84.6 (standard deviation 21.5) in the myomectomy group and 80.0 (standard deviation 22.0) in the uterine artery embolisation group (intention-to-treat complete-case analysis mean adjusted difference 8.0, 95% confidence interval 1.8 to 14.1, p = 0.01; mean adjusted difference using multiple imputation for missing responses 6.5, 95% confidence interval 1.1 to 11.9). The mean difference in the primary outcome at the 4-year follow-up time point was 5.0 (95% CI -1.4 to 11.5; p = 0.13) in favour of myomectomy. Perioperative and postoperative complications from all initial procedures occurred in similar percentages of women in both groups (29% in the myomectomy group vs. 24% in the UAE group). Twelve women in the uterine embolisation group and six women in the myomectomy group reported pregnancies over 4 years, resulting in seven and five live births, respectively (hazard ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 1.28). Over a 2-year time horizon, uterine artery embolisation was associated with higher costs than myomectomy (mean cost £7958, 95% confidence interval £6304 to £9612, vs. mean cost £7314, 95% confidence interval £5854 to £8773), but with fewer quality-adjusted life-years gained (0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.70 to 0.78, vs. 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.87). The differences in costs (difference £645, 95% confidence interval -£1381 to £2580) and quality-adjusted life-years (difference -0.09, 95% confidence interval -0.11 to -0.04) were small. Similar results were observed over the 4-year time horizon. At a threshold of willingness to pay for a gain of 1 QALY of £20,000, the probability of myomectomy being cost-effective is 98% at 2 years and 96% at 4 years. LIMITATIONS There were a substantial number of women who were not recruited because of their preference for a particular treatment option. CONCLUSIONS Among women with symptomatic uterine fibroids, myomectomy resulted in greater improvement in quality of life than did uterine artery embolisation. The differences in costs and quality-adjusted life-years are very small. Future research should involve women who are desiring pregnancy. TRIAL REGISTRATION This trial is registered as ISRCTN70772394. FUNDING This study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme, and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 22. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jane Daniels
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Lee J Middleton
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Versha Cheed
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - William McKinnon
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Dikshyanta Rana
- Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Fusun Sirkeci
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Whipps Cross Hospital, London, UK
| | - Isaac Manyonda
- Department of Gynaecology, St George's Hospital and Medical School, London, UK
| | - Anna-Maria Belli
- Department of Radiology, St George's Hospital and Medical School, London, UK
| | | | - Jonathan Moss
- School of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Olivia Wu
- Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Klim McPherson
- Department of Primary Care, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Banister K, Cook JA, Scotland G, Azuara-Blanco A, Goulão B, Heimann H, Hernández R, Hogg R, Kennedy C, Sivaprasad S, Ramsay C, Chakravarthy U. Non-invasive testing for early detection of neovascular macular degeneration in unaffected second eyes of older adults: EDNA diagnostic accuracy study. Health Technol Assess 2022; 26:1-142. [PMID: 35119357 DOI: 10.3310/vlfl1739] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neovascular age-related macular degeneration is a leading cause of sight loss, and early detection and treatment is important. For patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration in one eye, it is usual practice to monitor the unaffected eye. The test used to diagnose neovascular age-related macular degeneration, fundus fluorescein angiography, is an invasive test. Non-invasive tests are available, but their diagnostic accuracy is unclear. OBJECTIVES The primary objective was to determine the diagnostic monitoring performance of tests for neovascular age-related macular degeneration in the second eye of patients with unilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration. The secondary objectives were the cost-effectiveness of tests and to identify predictive factors of developing neovascular age-related macular degeneration. DESIGN This was a multicentre, prospective, cohort, comparative diagnostic accuracy study in a monitoring setting for up to 3 years. A Cox regression risk prediction model and a Markov microsimulation model comparing cost-effectiveness of the index tests over 25 years were used. SETTING This took place in hospital eye services. PARTICIPANTS Participants were adults (aged 50-95 years) with newly diagnosed (within the previous 6 weeks) neovascular age-related macular degeneration in one eye and an unaffected second (study) eye who were attending for treatment injections in the first eye and who had a study eye baseline visual acuity of ≥ 68 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters. INTERVENTIONS The index tests were Amsler chart (completed by participants), fundus clinical examination, optical coherence tomography, self-reported vision assessment (completed by participants) and visual acuity. The reference standard was fundus fluorescein angiography. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The main outcome measures were sensitivity and specificity; the performance of the risk predictor model; and costs and quality-adjusted life-years. RESULTS In total, 552 out of 578 patients who consented from 24 NHS hospitals (n = 16 ineligible; n = 10 withdrew consent) took part. The mean age of the patients was 77.4 years (standard deviation 7.7 years) and 57.2% were female. For the primary analysis, 464 patients underwent follow-up fundus fluorescein angiography and 120 developed neovascular age-related macular degeneration on fundus fluorescein angiography. The diagnostic accuracy [sensitivity (%) (95% confidence interval); specificity (%) (95% confidence interval)] was as follows: optical coherence tomography 91.7 (85.2 to 95.6); 87.8 (83.8 to 90.9)], fundus clinical examination [53.8 (44.8 to 62.5); 97.6 (95.3 to 98.9)], Amsler [33.7 (25.1 to 43.5); 81.4 (76.4 to 85.5)], visual acuity [30.0 (22.5 to 38.7); 66.3 (61.0 to 71.1)] and self-reported vision [4.2 (1.6 to 9.8); 97.0 (94.6 to 98.5)]. Optical coherence tomography had the highest sensitivity across all secondary analyses. The final prediction model for neovascular age-related macular degeneration in the non-affected eye included smoking status, family history of neovascular age-related macular degeneration, the presence of nodular drusen with or without reticular pseudodrusen, and the presence of pigmentary abnormalities [c-statistic 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.62 to 0.71)]. Optical coherence tomography monitoring generated the greatest quality-adjusted life-years gained per patient (optical coherence tomography, 5.830; fundus clinical examination, 5.787; Amsler chart, 5.736, self-reported vision, 5.630; and visual acuity, 5.600) for the lowest health-care and social care costs (optical coherence tomography, £19,406; fundus clinical examination, £19,649; Amsler chart, £19,751; self-reported vision, £20,198; and visual acuity, £20,444) over the lifetime of the simulated cohort. Optical coherence tomography dominated the other tests or had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds (£20,000) across the scenarios explored. LIMITATIONS The diagnostic performance may be different in an unselected population without any history of neovascular age-related macular degeneration; the prediction model did not include genetic profile data, which might have improved the discriminatory performance. CONCLUSIONS Optical coherence tomography was the most accurate in diagnosing conversion to neovascular age-related macular degeneration in the fellow eye of patients with unilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Economic modelling suggests that optical coherence tomography monitoring is cost-effective and leads to earlier diagnosis of and treatment for neovascular age-related macular degeneration in the second eye of patients being treated for neovascular age-related macular degeneration in their first eye. FUTURE WORK Future works should investigate the role of home monitoring, improved risk prediction models and impact on long-term visual outcomes. STUDY REGISTRATION This study was registered as ISRCTN48855678. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katie Banister
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Jonathan A Cook
- Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Graham Scotland
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.,Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | | | - Beatriz Goulão
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Heinrich Heimann
- Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Rodolfo Hernández
- Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Ruth Hogg
- Centre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Charlotte Kennedy
- Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Sobha Sivaprasad
- National Institute for Health Research Moorfields Biomedical Research Centre, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Craig Ramsay
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Marson AG, Burnside G, Appleton R, Smith D, Leach JP, Sills G, Tudur-Smith C, Plumpton CO, Hughes DA, Williamson PR, Baker G, Balabanova S, Taylor C, Brown R, Hindley D, Howell S, Maguire M, Mohanraj R, Smith PE. Lamotrigine versus levetiracetam or zonisamide for focal epilepsy and valproate versus levetiracetam for generalised and unclassified epilepsy: two SANAD II non-inferiority RCTs. Health Technol Assess 2021; 25:1-134. [PMID: 34931602 DOI: 10.3310/hta25750] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Levetiracetam (Keppra®, UCB Pharma Ltd, Slough, UK) and zonisamide (Zonegran®, Eisai Co. Ltd, Tokyo, Japan) are licensed as monotherapy for focal epilepsy, and levetiracetam is increasingly used as a first-line treatment for generalised epilepsy, particularly for women of childbearing age. However, there is uncertainty as to whether or not they should be recommended as first-line treatments owing to a lack of evidence of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. OBJECTIVES To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of lamotrigine (Lamictal®, GlaxoSmithKline plc, Brentford, UK) (standard treatment) with levetiracetam and zonisamide (new treatments) for focal epilepsy, and to compare valproate (Epilim®, Sanofi SA, Paris, France) (standard treatment) with levetiracetam (new treatment) for generalised and unclassified epilepsy. DESIGN Two pragmatic randomised unblinded non-inferiority trials run in parallel. SETTING Outpatient services in NHS hospitals throughout the UK. PARTICIPANTS Those aged ≥ 5 years with two or more spontaneous seizures that require anti-seizure medication. INTERVENTIONS Participants with focal epilepsy were randomised to receive lamotrigine, levetiracetam or zonisamide. Participants with generalised or unclassifiable epilepsy were randomised to receive valproate or levetiracetam. The randomisation method was minimisation using a web-based program. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was time to 12-month remission from seizures. For this outcome, and all other time-to-event outcomes, we report hazard ratios for the standard treatment compared with the new treatment. For the focal epilepsy trial, the non-inferiority limit (lamotrigine vs. new treatments) was 1.329. For the generalised and unclassified epilepsy trial, the non-inferiority limit (valproate vs. new treatments) was 1.314. Secondary outcomes included time to treatment failure, time to first seizure, time to 24-month remission, adverse reactions, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS Focal epilepsy. A total of 990 participants were recruited, of whom 330 were randomised to receive lamotrigine, 332 were randomised to receive levetiracetam and 328 were randomised to receive zonisamide. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority (hazard ratio 1.329) in the primary intention-to-treat analysis of time to 12-month remission (hazard ratio vs. lamotrigine 1.18, 97.5% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.47), but zonisamide did meet the criteria (hazard ratio vs. lamotrigine 1.03, 97.5% confidence interval 0.83 to 1.28). In the per-protocol analysis, lamotrigine was superior to both levetiracetam (hazard ratio 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.66) and zonisamide (hazard ratio 1.37, 95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.73). For time to treatment failure, lamotrigine was superior to levetiracetam (hazard ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.77) and zonisamide (hazard ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.60). Adverse reactions were reported by 33% of participants starting lamotrigine, 44% starting levetiracetam and 45% starting zonisamide. In the economic analysis, both levetiracetam and zonisamide were more costly and less effective than lamotrigine and were therefore dominated. Generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy. Of 520 patients recruited, 260 were randomised to receive valproate and 260 were randomised to receive to levetiracetam. A total of 397 patients had generalised epilepsy and 123 had unclassified epilepsy. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the primary intention-to-treat analysis of time to 12-month remission (hazard ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.47; non-inferiority margin 1.314). In the per-protocol analysis of time to 12-month remission, valproate was superior to levetiracetam (hazard ratio 1.68, 95% confidence interval 1.30 to 2.15). Valproate was superior to levetiracetam for time to treatment failure (hazard ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 0.83). Adverse reactions were reported by 37.4% of participants receiving valproate and 41.5% of those receiving levetiracetam. Levetiracetam was both more costly (incremental cost of £104, 95% central range -£587 to £1234) and less effective (incremental quality-adjusted life-year of -0.035, 95% central range -0.137 to 0.032) than valproate, and was therefore dominated. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, levetiracetam was associated with a probability of 0.17 of being cost-effective. LIMITATIONS The SANAD II trial was unblinded, which could have biased results by influencing decisions about dosing, treatment failure and the attribution of adverse reactions. FUTURE WORK SANAD II data could now be included in an individual participant meta-analysis of similar trials, and future similar trials are required to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of other new treatments, including lacosamide and perampanel. CONCLUSIONS Focal epilepsy - The SANAD II findings do not support the use of levetiracetam or zonisamide as first-line treatments in focal epilepsy. Generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy - The SANAD II findings do not support the use of levetiracetam as a first-line treatment for newly diagnosed generalised epilepsy. For women of childbearing potential, these results inform discussions about the benefit (lower teratogenicity) and harm (worse seizure outcomes and higher treatment failure rate) of levetiracetam compared with valproate. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN30294119 and EudraCT 2012-001884-64. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 75. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anthony G Marson
- Department of Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Girvan Burnside
- Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Richard Appleton
- The Roald Dahl EEG Unit, Alder Hey Children's Health Park, Liverpool, UK
| | - Dave Smith
- The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | | | - Graeme Sills
- Department of Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Catrin Tudur-Smith
- Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Catrin O Plumpton
- Centre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor, UK
| | - Dyfrig A Hughes
- Centre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor, UK
| | - Paula R Williamson
- Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Gus Baker
- Department of Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Silviya Balabanova
- Liverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Claire Taylor
- Liverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Richard Brown
- Addenbrooke's Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Dan Hindley
- Bolton NHS Foundation Trust, Royal Bolton Hospital, Bolton, UK
| | - Stephen Howell
- Department of Neurology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | | | | | - Philip Em Smith
- The Alan Richens Epilepsy Unit, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Hopewell S, Keene DJ, Heine P, Marian IR, Dritsaki M, Cureton L, Dutton SJ, Dakin H, Carr A, Hamilton W, Hansen Z, Jaggi A, Littlewood C, Barker K, Gray A, Lamb SE. Progressive exercise compared with best-practice advice, with or without corticosteroid injection, for rotator cuff disorders: the GRASP factorial RCT. Health Technol Assess 2021; 25:1-158. [PMID: 34382931 PMCID: PMC9421560 DOI: 10.3310/hta25480] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Rotator cuff-related shoulder pain is very common, but there is uncertainty regarding which modes of exercise delivery are optimal and the long-term benefits of corticosteroid injections. OBJECTIVES To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of progressive exercise compared with best-practice physiotherapy advice, with or without corticosteroid injection, in adults with a rotator cuff disorder. DESIGN This was a pragmatic multicentre superiority randomised controlled trial (with a 2 × 2 factorial design). SETTING Twenty NHS primary care-based musculoskeletal and related physiotherapy services. PARTICIPANTS Adults aged ≥ 18 years with a new episode of rotator cuff-related shoulder pain in the previous 6 months. INTERVENTIONS A total of 708 participants were randomised (March 2017-May 2019) by a centralised computer-generated 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 allocation ratio to one of four interventions: (1) progressive exercise (n = 174) (six or fewer physiotherapy sessions), (2) best-practice advice (n = 174) (one physiotherapy session), (3) corticosteroid injection then progressive exercise (n = 182) (six or fewer physiotherapy sessions) or (4) corticosteroid injection then best-practice advice (n = 178) (one physiotherapy session). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) score over 12 months. Secondary outcomes included SPADI subdomains, the EuroQol 5 Dimensions, five-level version, sleep disturbance, fear avoidance, pain self-efficacy, return to activity, Global Impression of Treatment and health resource use. Outcomes were collected by postal questionnaires at 8 weeks and at 6 and 12 months. A within-trial economic evaluation was also conducted. The primary analysis was intention to treat. RESULTS Participants had a mean age of 55.5 (standard deviation 13.1) years and 49.3% were female. The mean baseline SPADI score was 54.1 (standard deviation 18.5). Follow-up rates were 91% at 8 weeks and 87% at 6 and 12 months. There was an overall improvement in SPADI score from baseline in each group over time. Over 12 months, there was no evidence of a difference in the SPADI scores between the progressive exercise intervention and the best-practice advice intervention in shoulder pain and function (adjusted mean difference between groups over 12 months -0.66, 99% confidence interval -4.52 to 3.20). There was also no difference in SPADI scores between the progressive exercise intervention and best-practice advice intervention when analysed at the 8-week and 6- and 12-month time points. Injection resulted in improvement in shoulder pain and function at 8 weeks compared with no injection (adjusted mean difference -5.64, 99% confidence interval -9.93 to -1.35), but not when analysed over 12 months (adjusted mean difference -1.11, 99% confidence interval -4.47 to 2.26), or at 6 and 12 months. There were no serious adverse events. In the base-case analysis, adding injection to best-practice advice gained 0.021 quality-adjusted life-years (p = 0.184) and increased the cost by £10 per participant (p = 0.747). Progressive exercise alone was £52 (p = 0.247) more expensive per participant than best-practice advice, and gained 0.019 QALYs (p = 0.220). At a ceiling ratio of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, injection plus best-practice advice had a 54.93% probability of being the most cost-effective treatment. LIMITATIONS Participants and physiotherapists were not blinded to group allocation. Twelve-month follow-up may be insufficient for identifying all safety concerns. CONCLUSIONS Progressive exercise was not superior to a best-practice advice session with a physiotherapist. Subacromial corticosteroid injection improved shoulder pain and function, but provided only modest short-term benefit. Best-practice advice in combination with corticosteroid injection was expected to be most cost-effective, although there was substantial uncertainty. FUTURE WORK Longer-term follow-up, including any serious adverse effects of corticosteroid injection. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16539266 and EudraCT 2016-002991-28. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 48. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sally Hopewell
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - David J Keene
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Peter Heine
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Ioana R Marian
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Melina Dritsaki
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Lucy Cureton
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Susan J Dutton
- Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Helen Dakin
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Andrew Carr
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Willie Hamilton
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Zara Hansen
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Anju Jaggi
- Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust, Stanmore, UK
| | | | - Karen Barker
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Alastair Gray
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Sarah E Lamb
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Olabanji J, Oladele A, Oginni F, Oseni O. Burn safety knowledge in adult nigerians. Ann Burns Fire Disasters 2007; 20:115-120. [PMID: 21991080 PMCID: PMC3188076] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2006] [Indexed: 05/31/2023]
Abstract
Burn injuries remain a global problem even though they are largely preventable. Adequate knowledge is essential to good burn safety practices. This aids prevention and minimizes severity when burn injuries occur. The purpose of this study was to determine the level of burn safety knowledge among literate adult Nigerians in Ile-Ife and Ilesa, South-western Nigeria. We elicited a paucity of burn safety knowledge in the population studied, but a high level of formal education corresponded to a higher degree of burn safety knowledge. There is a need to introduce burn safety education into the school curriculum at all levels of education in order to increase burn safety awareness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J.K. Olabanji
- Department of Surgery, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
| | - A.O. Oladele
- Department of Surgery, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
| | - F.O. Oginni
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Obafemi Awolowo University
| | - O.G. Oseni
- Department of Surgery, Obafemi Awolowo University
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Napoli B, D'Arpa N, D'Amelio L, Chimenti S, Pileri D, Accardo-Palumbo A, Conte F. Staphylococcal Scalded Skin Syndrome: Criteria for Differential Diagnosis from Lyell's Syndrome. Two Cases in Adult Patients. Ann Burns Fire Disasters 2006; 19:188-91. [PMID: 21991049 PMCID: PMC3188114] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2006] [Indexed: 05/31/2023]
Abstract
A review of the relative international literature of the last few years is followed by a description of two cases of staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome in adults. As in both cases the initial diagnosis was that of Lyell's syndrome, the main criteria for the differential diagnosis of the two pathologies are considered in order to permit specific and effective treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B Napoli
- Plastic Surgery and Burns Therapy Operative Unit, ARNAS, Civic Hospital, Palermo, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
|