Background Inconsistent use of generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments in multiple sclerosis (MS) studies limits cross-country comparability. The objectives: 1) investigate real-world HRQOL of MS patients using both generic and disease-specific HRQOL instruments in the Netherlands, France, the United Kingdom, Spain, Germany and Italy; 2) compare HRQOL among these countries; 3) determine factors associated with HRQOL. Methods A cross-sectional, observational online web-based survey amongst MS patients was conducted in June–October 2019. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and two HRQOL instruments: the generic EuroQOL (EQ-5D-5L) and disease-related Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life (MSQOL)-54, an extension of the generic Short Form-36 (SF-36) was collected. Health utility scores were calculated using country-specific value sets. Mean differences in HRQOL were analysed and predictors of HRQOL were explored in regression analyses. Results In total 182 patients were included (the Netherlands: n = 88; France: n = 58; the United Kingdom: n = 15; Spain: n = 10; living elsewhere: n = 11). Mean MSQOL-54 physical and mental composite scores (42.5, SD:17.2; 58.3, SD:21.5) were lower, whereas the SF-36 physical and mental composite scores (46.8, SD:22.6; 53.1, SD:22.5) were higher than reported in previous clinical trials. The mean EQ-5D utility was 0.65 (SD:0.26). Cross-country differences in HRQOL were found. A common predictor of HRQOL was disability status and primary progressive MS. Conclusions The effects of MS on HRQOL in real-world patients may be underestimated. Combined use of generic and disease-specific HRQOL instruments enhance the understanding of the health needs of MS patients. Consequent use of the same instruments in clinical trials and observational studies improves cross-country comparability of HRQOL.

No abstract

Existing prognostic methods were compared in their ability to predict mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients on dialysis for acute renal failure (ARF). The clinical goal of this study was to determine whether these models could identify a group of patients where dialysis would provide no benefit because of a near 100% certainty of death even with dialysis treatment. This retrospective cohort study included 238 adult patients who received a first dialysis treatment for ARF in the ICU. This study examined the performance of seven general ICU mortality prediction models and four mortality prediction models developed for patients with ARF. These models were assessed for their ability to discriminate mortality form survival and for their ability to calibrate the observed mortality rate with the expected mortality rate. The observed in hospital mortality was 76% for our patient group. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranged from 0.50 to 0.78. With the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III and the Liano models, the observed mortality in the highest quintiles of risk were 97% and 98%. In conclusion, although none of the models examined in this study showed excellent discrimination between those patients who died in hospital and those who did not, some models (APACHE III, Liano) were able to identify a group of patients with a near 100% chance of mortality. This indicates that these models may have some use in supporting the decision not to initiate dialysis in a subgroup of patients.

No abstract

No abstract