A Questionnaire Using the Modified 2010 American College of Rheumatology Criteria for Fibromyalgia: Specificity and Sensitivity in Clinical Practice

2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (9) ◽  
pp. 1590-1595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Ferrari ◽  
Anthony S. Russell
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Clinical Assessment ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Cutoff Score ◽  
Widespread Pain ◽  
American College Of Rheumatology ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity

Objective.To determine the specificity and sensitivity of the Modified 2010 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia (given as a self-administered questionnaire) in clinical practice.Methods.A cohort of patients with widespread pain, referred by primary care physicians to rheumatologists, completed the questionnaire for the Modified ACR 2010 criteria. Prior to completion of the questionnaire, patients were diagnosed by at least 1 rheumatologist as either having fibromyalgia (FM) or not having FM, using the rheumatologist’s clinical assessment as the gold standard for diagnosis of FM. The Modified ACR 2010 criteria were then applied to determine whether a diagnosis of FM was satisfied by the criteria. Sensitivity and specificity were determined, using the rheumatologist’s clinical assessment as the gold standard. A score ≥ 12 on the Modified ACR 2010 criteria questionnaire was also tested as the criterion to satisfy a diagnosis of FM, and subsequently to determine sensitivity and specificity. We examined the effect of using a cutoff score ≥ 13, as previous research indicated that this may be a more useful cutoff value.Results.A total of 451 subjects completed the questionnaire: 174 with an a priori diagnosis of FM by a rheumatologist and 277 with widespread pain who did not have an a priori clinical diagnosis of FM by a rheumatologist. The Modified ACR 2010 criteria were satisfied by 90.2% of patients with an a priori diagnosis of FM, and by 10.5% of subjects who had widespread pain, but were not diagnosed with FM when previously assessed by a rheumatologist. Thus, sensitivity and specificity are 90.2% and 89.5%, respectively, using the Modified ACR 2010 criteria. A score ≥ 12 on the Modified ACR 2010 criteria was observed in 97.4% of patients with an a priori diagnosis of FM, and 14.8% of subjects who had widespread pain, but were not diagnosed with FM when previously assessed by a rheumatologist. Thus, the sensitivity and specificity are 97.4% and 85.2%, respectively, using a cutoff score ≥ 12. Using a score of ≥ 13, however, the sensitivity was 93.1% and the specificity was 91.7%.Conclusion.The Modified ACR 2010 criteria questionnaire can be used in primary care as a tool to assist physicians in the diagnosis of FM with high specificity and sensitivity. Calculating the total score on a Modified ACR 2010 criteria questionnaire, and setting the value of ≥ 13 as the cutoff for a diagnosis of FM appears to be the most effective approach. The Modified ACR 2010 criteria may reduce the need for rheumatology referral simply for the diagnosis of FM.

scholarly journals Histopathology of vasculitis

Reumatismo ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 155-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Bajocchi ◽  
A. Cavazza
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Assessment ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Sampling Error ◽  
Systemic Vasculitis ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Disease Evolution ◽  
Changes Over Time ◽  
Broad Complex ◽  
Over Time

The range of pathologies that are related to primitive vasculitis is broad, complex and not as typical as we would expect. Clinicians should be aware that several forms of primitive and systemic vasculitis, regardless of the size of the affected vessel, may exhibit identical histological alterations. This observation has important clinical implications as it means that cases of vasculitis do not correspond clinically and histologically. Thus, while histology remains the diagnostic gold standard, it can be used only as part of the most complete clinical assessment possible. Another point worth of the clinician’s attention is that vasculitis histology changes over time, as do disease evolution and activity, even without considering the masking effects of treatment and the possibility of sampling error due to the patchy occurrence of vasculitis. The purpose of this review is to identify the most common forms of vasculitis in clinical practice, and to provide guidance to the clinician on the pathology of the vessels.

scholarly journals The Sensitivity and Specificity of Potassium Hydroxide Smear and Fungal Culture Relative to Clinical Assessment in the Evaluation of Tinea Pedis: A Pooled Analysis

2010 ◽  
Vol 2010 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Oren Levitt ◽  
Barrie H. Levitt ◽  
Arash Akhavan ◽  
Howard Yanofsky
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Clinical Assessment ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Potassium Hydroxide ◽  
Tinea Pedis ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Antifungal Drugs ◽  
Fungal Culture ◽  
Sensitive Test

Background. There are relatively few studies published examining the sensitivity and specificity of potassium hydroxide (KOH) smear and fungal culture examination of tinea pedis.Objective. To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of KOH smear and fungal culture for diagnosing tinea pedis.Methods. A pooled analysis of data from five similarly conducted bioequivalence trials for antifungal drugs was performed. Data from 460 patients enrolled in the vehicle arms of these studies with clinical diagnosis of tinea pedis supported by positive fungal culture were analyzed 6 weeks after initiation of the study to determine the sensitivity and specificity of KOH smear and fungal culture.Results. Using clinical assessment as the gold standard, the sensitivities for KOH smear and culture were 73.3% (95% CI: 66.3 to 79.5%) and 41.7% (34.6 to 49.1%), respectively. The respective specificities for culture and KOH smear were 77.7% (72.2 to 82.5%) and 42.5% (36.6 to 48.6%).Conclusion. KOH smear and fungal culture are complementary diagnostic tests for tinea pedis, with the former being the more sensitive test of the two, and the latter being more specific.

scholarly journals Laboratory evaluation of the rapid diagnostic tests for the detection of Vibrio cholerae O1 using diarrheal samples

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. e0009521
Author(s):  
Goutam Chowdhury ◽  
Tarosi Senapati ◽  
Bhabatosh Das ◽  
Asha Kamath ◽  
Debottam Pal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Vibrio Cholerae ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Diarrheal Disease ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Rapid Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Laboratory Evaluation ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity ◽  
Stool Samples

Background Cholera, an acute diarrheal disease is a major public health problem in many developing countries. Several rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) are available for the detection of cholera, but their efficacies are not compared in an endemic setting. In this study, we have compared the specificity and sensitivity of three RDT kits for the detection of Vibrio cholerae O1 and compared their efficiency with culture and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods. Methods Five hundred six diarrheal stool samples collected from patients from two different hospitals in Kolkata, India were tested using SD Bioline Cholera, SMART-II Cholera O1 and Crystal-VC RDT kits. All the stool samples were screened for the presence of V. cholerae by direct and enrichment culture methods. Stool DNA-based PCR assay was made to target the cholera toxin (ctxAB) and O1 somatic antigen (rfb) encoding genes. Statistical evaluation of the RDTs has been made using STATA software with stool culture and PCR results as the gold standards. The Bayesian latent class model (LCM) was used to evaluate the diagnostic tests in the absence of the gold standard. Results Involving culture technique as gold standard, the sensitivity and specificity of the cholera RDT kits in the direct testing of stools was highest with SAMRT-II (86.1%) and SD-Cholera (94.4%), respectively. The DNA based PCR assays gave very high sensitivity (98.4%) but the specificity was comparatively low (75.3%). After enrichment, the high sensitivity and specificity was detected with SAMRT-II (78.8%) and SD-Cholera (99.1%), respectively. Considering PCR as the gold standard, the sensitivity and specificity of the RDTs remained between 52.3–58.2% and 92.3–96.8%, respectively. In the LCM, the sensitivity of direct and enrichment testing was high in SAMRT-II (88% and 92%, respectively), but the specificity was high in SD cholera for both the methods (97% and 100%, respectively). The sensitivity/specificity of RDTs and direct culture have also been analyzed considering the age, gender and diarrheal disease severity of the patients. Conclusion Overall, the performance of the RDT kits remained almost similar in terms of specificity and sensitivity. Performance of PCR was superior to the antibody-based RDTs. The RTDs are very useful in identifying cholera cases during outbreak/epidemic situations and for making them as a point-of-care (POC) testing tool needs more improvement.

17. Boundaries or overlap: An examination of the community-oriented clinical practice of community medicine specialists and family/general practitioners

2007 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 36
Author(s):  
M. L. Russell ◽  
L. McIntyre
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Community Health ◽  
Royal College ◽  
Community Medicine ◽  
Work Setting ◽  
Public Health Medicine ◽  
Work Settings ◽  
Main Work

We compared the work settings and “community-oriented clinical practice” of Community Medicine (CM) specialists and family physicians/general practitioners (FP). We conducted secondary data analysis of the 2004 National Physician Survey (NPS) to examine main work setting and clinical activity reported by 154 CM (40% of eligible CM in Canada) and 11,041 FP (36% of eligible FP in Canada). Text data from the specialist questionnaire related to “most common conditions that you treat” were extracted from the Master database for CM specialists, and subjected to thematic analysis and coded. CM specialists were more likely than FP to engage in “community medicine/public health” (59.7% vs 15.3%); while the opposite was found for primary care (13% vs. 78.2%). CM specialists were less likely to indicate a main work setting of private office/clinic/community health centre/community hospital than were FP (13.6% vs. 75.6%). Forty-five percent of CM provided a response to “most common conditions treated” with the remainder either leaving the item blank or indicating that they did not treat individual patients. The most frequently named conditions in rank order were: psychiatric disorders; public health program/activity; respiratory problems; hypertension; and metabolic disorders (diabetes). There is some overlap in the professional activities and work settings of CM specialists and FP. The “most commonly treated conditions” suggest that some CM specialists may be practicing primary care as part of the Royal College career path of “community-oriented clinical practice.” However the “most commonly treated conditions” do not specifically indicate an orientation of that practice towards “an emphasis on health promotion and disease prevention” as also specified by the Royal College for that CM career path. This raises questions about the appropriateness of the current training requirements and career paths as delineated for CM specialists by the Royal College of Physicians & Surgeons of Canada. Bhopal R. Public health medicine and primary health care: convergent, divergent, or parallel paths? J Epidemiol Community Health 1995; 49:113-6. Pettersen BJ, Johnsen R. More physicians in public health: less public health work? Scan J Public Health 2005; 33:91-8. Stanwell-Smith R. Public health medicine in transition. J Royal Society of Medicine 2001; 94(7):319-21.

WikiRecs primary care: developing rapid recommendations for primary care through effective collaboration between systematic review and guideline teams

2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp18X697085
Author(s):  
Trudy Bekkering ◽  
Bert Aertgeerts ◽  
Ton Kuijpers ◽  
Mieke Vermandere ◽  
Jako Burgers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Urinary Stones ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
Supervised Exercise ◽  
Review Team ◽  
New Evidence

BackgroundThe WikiRecs evidence summaries and recommendations for clinical practice are developed using trustworthy methods. The process is triggered by studies that may potentially change practice, aiming at implementing new evidence into practice fast.AimTo share our first experiences developing WikiRecs for primary care and to reflect on the possibilities and pitfalls of this method.MethodIn March 2017, we started developing WikiRecs for primary health care to speed up the process of making potentially practice-changing evidence in clinical practice. Based on a well-structured question a systematic review team summarises the evidence using the GRADE approach. Subsequently, an international panel of primary care physicians, methodological experts and patients formulates recommendations for clinical practice. The patient representatives are involved as full guideline panel members. The final recommendations and supporting evidence are disseminated using various platforms, including MAGICapp and scientific journals.ResultsWe are developing WikiRecs on two topics: alpha-blockers for urinary stones and supervised exercise therapy for intermittent claudication. We did not face major problems but will reflect on issues we had to solve so far. We anticipate having the first WikiRecs for primary care available at the end of 2017.ConclusionThe WikiRecs process is a promising method — that is still evolving — to rapidly synthesise and bring new evidence into primary care practice, while adhering to high quality standards.

scholarly journals P34 Characteristics, diagnosis and management of Cushing’s disease - A systematic review and meta-analysis

BJS Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chan Hee Koh ◽  
Danyal Z Khan ◽  
Ronneil Digpal ◽  
Hugo Layard Horsfall ◽  
Hani J Marcus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Cushing’S Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Pituitary Surgery ◽  
Serum Cortisol ◽  
Cushing's Disease ◽  
Diagnosis And Management ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Introduction The clinical practice and research in the diagnosis and management of Cushing’s disease remains heterogeneous and challenging to this day. We sought to establish the characteristics of Cushing’s disease, and the trends in diagnosis, management and reporting in this field. Methods Searches of PubMed and Embase were conducted. Study protocol was registered a-priori. Random-effects analyses were conducted to establish numerical estimates. Results Our screening returned 159 papers. The average age of adult patients with Cushing’s disease was 39.3, and 13.6 for children. The male:female ratio was 1:3. 8% of patients had undergone previous transsphenoidal resection. The ratio of macroadenomas: microadenomas:imaging-undetectable adenomas was 18:53:29. The most commonly reported preoperative biochemical investigations were serum cortisol (average 26.4µg/dL) and ACTH (77.5pg/dL). Postoperative cortisol was most frequently used to define remission (74.8%), most commonly with threshold of 5µg/dL (44.8%). Average remission rates were 77.8% with recurrence rate of 13.9%. Median follow-up was 38 months. Majority of papers reported age (81.9%) and sex (79.4%). Only 56.6% reported whether their patients had previous pituitary surgery. 45.3% reported whether their adenomas were macroadenoma, microadenoma or undetectable. Only 24.1% reported preoperative cortisol, and this did not improve over time. 60.4% reported numerical thresholds for cortisol in defining remission, and this improved significantly over time (p = 0.004). Visual inspection of bubbleplots showed increasing preference for threshold of 5µg/dL. 70.4% reported the length of follow up. Conclusion We quantified the characteristics of Cushing’s disease, and analysed the trends in investigation and reporting. This review may help to inform future efforts in forming guidelines for research and clinical practice.

319 Validation of the Insomnia Severity Index Short-Form for Identifying Insomnia Disorder in Young Adult Cancer Survivors

SLEEP ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. A128-A128
Author(s):  
Lydia Chevalier ◽  
Alexis Michaud ◽  
Eric Zhou ◽  
Grace Chang ◽  
Christopher Recklitis
Keyword(s):  
Young Adult ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Short Form ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Severity Index ◽  
Young Adult Cancer Survivors ◽  
Adult Cancer Survivors ◽  
Young Adult Cancer ◽  
Insomnia Severity

Abstract Introduction Insomnia is a common and impairing late effect experienced by many young adult cancer survivors (YACS). Although routine evaluation of sleep disorders in cancer survivors is recommended, lack of consensus on appropriate screening measures contributes to under-identification and under-treatment of these disorders in YACS. As screening measures are ideally as brief as possible while maintaining validity, we sought to validate the recently published three-item Insomnia Severity Index Short-Form (ISI-SF) in YACS. Methods 250 YACS completed the ISI and the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 (SCID-5). The ISI-SF was created by summing three ISI items: distress (item #6), interference (item #7), and satisfaction (item #4). In receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses, area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to compare discrimination on the ISI-SF to two criteria: the full-scale ISI using a cutoff of ≥8 recently validated in this sample, and the SCID-5 insomnia module. Consistent with previous research, we specified a priori that a cut-off score on the ISI-SF with sensitivity ≥.85 and specificity ≥.75 would be acceptable. Results The ISI-SF had excellent discrimination when compared to the full-scale ISI (AUC = .97) and a cut-off score of ≥4 met criteria with a sensitivity of 97% and specificity of 86%. The ISI-SF had good discrimination when compared to the SCID-5 (AUC = .88), but none of the cut-off scores met a priori criteria for sensitivity and specificity. A cut-off score of ≥4 came closest with a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 70%. Conclusion Although the ISI-SF did not meet sensitivity and specificity criteria for a stand-alone screening measure when compared to a diagnostic interview, it demonstrated utility as the first step in a two-step screening procedure. Specifically, the high sensitivity of the ≥4 ISI-F cut-off score is well-suited to accurately screening out YACS who do not need insomnia services; as a second screen, the SCID-5 insomnia module could be administered only to those elevated on the ISI-SF in order to identify false positives cases before making referrals for insomnia specialists. Support (if any) National Cancer Institute (1R21CA223832), Swim Across America

Development of a suspicion index for secondary schizophrenia using the Delphi method

2021 ◽  
pp. 000486742110257
Author(s):  
Olivier Bonnot ◽  
Jose Luis Insua ◽  
Mark Walterfang ◽  
Juan Vincente Torres ◽  
Stefan Armin Kolb
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Delphi Method ◽  
Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders ◽  
Differential Distribution ◽  
Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Schizophrenia Spectrum ◽  
Spectrum Disorders ◽  
Aids Diagnosis ◽  
Suspicion Index

Aim: The aim of this study was to develop a suspicion index that aids diagnosis of secondary schizophrenia spectrum disorders in regular clinical practice. Method: We used the Delphi method to rate and refine questionnaire items in consecutive rounds. Differences in mean expert responses for schizophrenia spectrum disorders and secondary schizophrenia spectrum disorders populations allowed to define low/middle/high predictive items, which received different weights. Algorithm performance was tested in 198 disease profiles by means of sensitivity and specificity. Results: Twelve experts completed the Delphi process, and consensus was reached in 19/24 (79.2%) items for schizophrenia spectrum disorders and 17/24 (70.8%) for secondary schizophrenia spectrum disorders. We assigned rounded values to each item category according to their predictive potential. A differential distribution of scores was observed between schizophrenia spectrum disorders and secondary schizophrenia spectrum disorders when applying the suspicion index for validation to 198 disease profiles. Sensitivity and specificity analyses allowed to set a >8/10/16 risk prediction score as a threshold to consider medium/high/very high suspicion of secondary schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Conclusion: Our final outcome was the Secondary Schizophrenia Suspicion Index, the first paper-based and reliable algorithm to discriminate secondary schizophrenia spectrum disorders from schizophrenia spectrum disorders with the potential to help improve the detection of secondary schizophrenia spectrum disorder cases in clinical practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document