Objective:To develop and validate an outcome scale for the cervical radicular syndrome and to build a mapping, predicting EQ-5D utility from the new scale. Study design and setting:An item pool was... Show moreObjective:To develop and validate an outcome scale for the cervical radicular syndrome and to build a mapping, predicting EQ-5D utility from the new scale. Study design and setting:An item pool was developed based on literature and patient and clinician interviews. Item selection was based on symptomatology, factor analysis, and internal consistency. We assessed: (a) test-retest reliability by standard error of measurement and intraclass correlation coefficients; (b) construct validity by testing 22 hypotheses on relationships with existing measures and known-group differences. For the mapping, performance was assessed by mean absolute error and root mean squared error. Results:A total of 254 patients with cervical radicular syndrome completed the first questionnaire, 61 stable patients a retest. Item selection led to a 21-item questionnaire consisting of three subscales: Symptoms, Energy and postures, and Actions and activities. Standard error of measurement values ranged from 6.7 to 11.2 on a 0 to 100 scale. All subscales showed good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.84, 0.87, and 0.94). All hypotheses for construct validity were confirmed. A linear utility mapping was preferred, with reasonable statistical performance. Conclusion:We developed a reliable and valid cervical radicular syndrome specific outcome scale, called the Cervical Radiculopathy Impact Scale (CRIS). This new questionnaire may facilitate (cost-)effectiveness studies in this field. Show less
Pieterse, A.H.; Kunneman, M.; Hout, W.B. van den; Baas-Thijssen, M.; Geijsen, E.D.; Ceha, H.M.; ... ; Stiggelbout, A.M. 2019
INTRODUCTION: Cost-effectiveness is an important criterion in the decision to cover interventions in health insurance packages. One of the outcome measures, the quality-adjusted life year, has been... Show moreINTRODUCTION: Cost-effectiveness is an important criterion in the decision to cover interventions in health insurance packages. One of the outcome measures, the quality-adjusted life year, has been criticised on its assumptions and implications concerning life expectancy and quality of life. Several studies have been conducted that measured societal preferences concerning healthcare rationing decisions. These studies mainly focused on one attribute. To adjust quality-adjusted life year maximisation in accordance with societal preferences, the relative importance of attributes should be studied. The present study aims to measure the relative importance of age, gender, socioeconomic status, pre-intervention health state, treatment effect, chance of treatment success and number of people in need of the intervention. A secondary objective is to compare the validity of the willingness to pay method with the validity of a relatively new preference elicitation method, best-worst scaling. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A representative sample of 2000 Dutch citizens, over 18 years of age, are recruited to complete a web-based survey containing treatment scenarios. The scenarios present different levels of attributes. Respondents are asked to select one of the four scenarios that they prefer to be covered by the Dutch standard health insurance package and one that they prefer not to be covered. They are also asked to indicate how much they are willing to pay for each treatment scenario. At the end of the survey, respondents are asked to rate every attribute on a 1-10 scale. Two versions of the questionnaire are developed which differ on the framing, that is, treatments can be added to or removed from the insurance package. The data will be analysed by means of sequential conditional logit analysis (best-worst scaling) and analysis of variance (willingness to pay). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol is reviewed and approved by the medical ethical committee of the University Medical Center Leiden. Show less
Hofstede, S.N.; Marang-van de Mheen, P.J.; Assendelft, W.J.J.; Vleggeert-Lankamp, C.L.A.; Stiggelbout, A.M.; Vroomen, P.C.A.J.; ... ; DISC Study Grp 2012
BACKGROUND: Sciatica is a common condition worldwide that is characterized by radiating leg pain and regularly caused by a herniated disc with nerve root compression. Sciatica patients with... Show moreBACKGROUND: Sciatica is a common condition worldwide that is characterized by radiating leg pain and regularly caused by a herniated disc with nerve root compression. Sciatica patients with persisting leg pain after six to eight weeks were found to have similar clinical outcomes and associated costs after prolonged conservative treatment or surgery at one year follow-up. Guidelines recommend that the team of professionals involved in sciatica care and patients jointly decide about treatment options, so-called interprofessional shared decision making (SDM). However, there are strong indications that SDM for sciatica patients is not integrated in daily practice. We designed a study aiming to explore the barriers and facilitators associated with the everyday embedding of SDM for sciatica patients. All related relevant professionals and patients are involved to develop a tailored strategy to implement SDM for sciatica patients. METHODS: The study consists of two phases: identification of barriers and facilitators and development of an implementation strategy. First, barriers and facilitators are explored using semi-structured interviews among eight professionals of each (para)medical discipline involved in sciatica care (general practitioners, physical therapists, neurologists, neurosurgeons, and orthopedic surgeons). In addition, three focus groups will be conducted among patients. Second, the identified barriers and facilitators will be ranked using a questionnaire among a representative Dutch sample of 200 GPs, 200 physical therapists, 200 neurologists, all 124 neurosurgeons, 200 orthopedic surgeons, and 100 patients. A tailored team-based implementation strategy will be developed based on the results of the first phase using the principles of intervention mapping and an expert panel. DISCUSSION: Little is known about effective strategies to increase the uptake of SDM. Most implementation strategies only target a single discipline, whereas multiple disciplines are involved in SDM among sciatica patients. The results of this study can be used as an example for implementing SDM in other patient groups receiving multidisciplinary complex care (e.g., elderly) and can be generalized to other countries with similar context, thereby contributing to a worldwide increase of SDM in preference sensitive choices. Show less
Stiggelbout, A.M.; Osch, S.M.C. van; Hout, W.B. van den 2006
