No abstract

PurposeThe evidence regarding the (cost-)effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) in patients with therapy-resistant idiopathic slow-transit constipation is of suboptimal quality. The Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports has granted conditional reimbursement for SNM treatment. The objective is to assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and budget impact of SNM compared to personalized conservative treatment (PCT) in patients with idiopathic slow-transit constipation refractory to conservative treatment.MethodsThis study is an open-label, multicenter randomized controlled trial. Patients aged 14 to 80 with slow-transit constipation, a defecation frequency (DF) < 3 per week and meeting at least one other Rome-IV criterion, are eligible. Patients with obstructed outlet, irritable bowel syndrome, bowel pathology, or rectal prolapse are excluded. Patients are randomized to SNM or PCT. The primary outcome is success at 6 months (DF ≥ 3 a week), requiring a sample size of 64 (α = 0.05, β = 0.80, 30% difference in success). Secondary outcomes are straining, sense of incomplete evacuation, constipation severity, fatigue, constipation specific and generic quality of life, and costs at 6 months. Long-term costs and effectiveness will be estimated by a decision analytic model. The time frame is 57 months, starting October 2016. SNM treatment costs are funded by the Dutch conditional reimbursement program, research costs by Medtronic.ConclusionsThe results of this trial will be used to make a final decision regarding reimbursement of SNM from the Dutch Health Care Package in this patient group.Trial registrationThis trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT02961582, on 12 October 2016.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00384-018-2978-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background and Aim Standardizing evaluative outcomes and their assessment facilitates comparisons between clinical studies and provides a basis for comparing direct effects of different treatment options. The aim of this study was to systematically review types of outcomes and measurement instruments used in studies regarding treatment options for slow‐transit constipation (STC) in adults. Methods In this systematic review of the literature, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO from inception through February 2018, for papers assessing any STC treatment in adult patients. Outcomes were systematically extracted and categorized in domains using the conceptual framework of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology filter 2.0. Outcome reporting was stratified by decade of publication, intervention, and study type. Results Forty‐seven studies were included in this systematic review. Fifty‐nine different types of outcomes were identified. The outcomes were structured in three core areas and 18 domains. The most commonly reported domains were defecation functions (94%), gastrointestinal transit (53%), and health‐care service use (51%). The most frequently reported outcomes were defecation frequency (83%), health‐related quality of life (43%), and adverse events and complications (43%). In 62% of the studies, no primary outcome was defined, whereas in two studies, more than one primary outcomes were selected. A wide diversity of measurement instruments was used to assess the reported outcomes. Conclusion Outcomes reported in studies on STC in adults are heterogeneous. A lack of standardization complicates comparisons between studies. Developing a core outcome set for STC in adults could contribute to standardization of outcome reporting in (future) studies.

IntroductionThe variety, time patterns and long-term prognosis of persistent COVID-19 symptoms (long COVID-19) in patients who suffered from mild to severe acute COVID-19 are incompletely understood. Cohort studies will be combined to describe the prevalence of long COVID-19 symptoms, and to explore the pathophysiological mechanisms and impact on health-related quality of life. A prediction model for long COVID-19 will be developed and internally validated to guide care in future patients.Methods and analysisData from seven COVID-19 cohorts will be aggregated in the longitudinal multiple cohort CORona Follow Up (CORFU) study. CORFU includes Dutch patients who suffered from COVID-19 at home, were hospitalised without or with intensive care unit treatment, needed inpatient or outpatient rehabilitation and controls who did not suffer from COVID-19. Individual cohort study designs were aligned and follow-up has been synchronised. Cohort participants will be followed up for a maximum of 24 months after acute infection. Next to the clinical characteristics measured in individual cohorts, the CORFU questionnaire on long COVID-19 outcomes and determinants will be administered digitally at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after the infection. The primary outcome is the prevalence of long COVID-19 symptoms up to 2 years after acute infection. Secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life (eg, EQ-5D), physical functioning, and the prevalence of thromboembolic complications, respiratory complications, cardiovascular diseases and endothelial dysfunction. A prediction model and a patient platform prototype will be developed.Ethics and disseminationApproval was obtained from the medical research ethics committee of Maastricht University Medical Center+ and Maastricht University (METC 2021-2990) and local committees of the participating cohorts. The project is supported by ZonMW and EuroQol Research Foundation. Results will be published in open access peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at (inter)national conferences.Trial registration numberNCT05240742.