Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Solomon AJ, Marrie RA, Viswanathan S, Correale J, Magyari M, Robertson NP, et al.
    Neurology, 2023 Aug 08;101(6):e624-e635.
    PMID: 37321866 DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000207481
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Recent data suggest increasing global prevalence of multiple sclerosis (MS). Early diagnosis of MS reduces the burden of disability-adjusted life years and associated health care costs. Yet diagnostic delays persist in MS care and even within national health care systems with robust resources, comprehensive registries, and MS subspecialist referral networks. The global prevalence and characteristics of barriers to expedited MS diagnosis, particularly in resource-restricted regions, have not been extensively studied. Recent revisions to MS diagnostic criteria demonstrate potential to facilitate earlier diagnosis, but global implementation remains largely unknown.

    METHODS: The Multiple Sclerosis International Federation third edition of the Atlas of MS was a survey that assessed the current global state of diagnosis including adoption of MS diagnostic criteria; barriers to diagnosis with respect to the patient, health care provider, and health system; and existence of national guidelines or national standards for speed of MS diagnosis.

    RESULTS: Coordinators from 107 countries (representing approximately 82% of the world population), participated. Eighty-three percent reported at least 1 "major barrier" to early MS diagnosis. The most frequently reported barriers included the following: "lack of awareness of MS symptoms among general public" (68%), "lack of awareness of MS symptoms among health care professionals" (59%), and "lack of availability of health care professionals with knowledge to diagnose MS" (44%). One-third reported lack of "specialist medical equipment or diagnostic tests." Thirty-four percent reported the use of only 2017 McDonald criteria (McD-C) for diagnosis, and 79% reported 2017 McD-C as the "most commonly used criteria." Sixty-six percent reported at least 1 barrier to the adoption of 2017 McD-C, including "neurologists lack awareness or training" by 45%. There was no significant association between national guidelines pertaining to MS diagnosis or practice standards addressing the speed of diagnosis and presence of barriers to early MS diagnosis and implementation of 2017 McD-C.

    DISCUSSION: This study finds pervasive consistent global barriers to early diagnosis of MS. While these barriers reflected a lack of resources in many countries, data also suggest that interventions designed to develop and implement accessible education and training can provide cost-effective opportunities to improve access to early MS diagnosis.

  2. Wu Y, Levis B, Daray FM, Ioannidis JPA, Patten SB, Cuijpers P, et al.
    Psychol Assess, 2023 Feb;35(2):95-114.
    PMID: 36689386 DOI: 10.1037/pas0001181
    The seven-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Depression subscale (HADS-D) and the total score of the 14-item HADS (HADS-T) are both used for major depression screening. Compared to the HADS-D, the HADS-T includes anxiety items and requires more time to complete. We compared the screening accuracy of the HADS-D and HADS-T for major depression detection. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis and fit bivariate random effects models to assess diagnostic accuracy among participants with both HADS-D and HADS-T scores. We identified optimal cutoffs, estimated sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals, and compared screening accuracy across paired cutoffs via two-stage and individual-level models. We used a 0.05 equivalence margin to assess equivalency in sensitivity and specificity. 20,700 participants (2,285 major depression cases) from 98 studies were included. Cutoffs of ≥7 for the HADS-D (sensitivity 0.79 [0.75, 0.83], specificity 0.78 [0.75, 0.80]) and ≥15 for the HADS-T (sensitivity 0.79 [0.76, 0.82], specificity 0.81 [0.78, 0.83]) minimized the distance to the top-left corner of the receiver operating characteristic curve. Across all sets of paired cutoffs evaluated, differences of sensitivity between HADS-T and HADS-D ranged from -0.05 to 0.01 (0.00 at paired optimal cutoffs), and differences of specificity were within 0.03 for all cutoffs (0.02-0.03). The pattern was similar among outpatients, although the HADS-T was slightly (not nonequivalently) more specific among inpatients. The accuracy of HADS-T was equivalent to the HADS-D for detecting major depression. In most settings, the shorter HADS-D would be preferred. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links