Accounting for Unobservable Preference Heterogeneity and Evaluating Alternative Anchoring Approaches to Estimate Country-Specific EQ-5D-Y Value Sets: A Case Study Using Spanish Preference Data

ObjectivesThe EuroQol Group published the EQ-5D-Y valuation protocol that recommends 2 valuation techniques to elicit preferences: composite time trade-off (C-TTO) and discrete choice experiments (DCEs). The protocol left the decision of what modeling approach to use open for researchers. Our aims were to explore modeling strategies allowing generation of EQ-5D-Y value sets and to produce an EQ-5D-Y Spanish value set.MethodsWe used EQ-5D-Y DCE and C-TTO data collected in Spain following the protocol and adopted a staged approach for our modeling exercise. First, we selected the best performing DCE latent class model and evaluated models from 2 to 10 classes. We selected the preferred model based on best goodness of fit in terms of the Bayesian information criterion. We considered 2 anchoring approaches to estimate utility values: (1) pits state anchoring and (2) hybrid models (using all available C-TTO responses). All analysis were weighted to be representative of the Spanish population.ResultsWe collected 1005 DCE and 200 C-TTO interviews. We selected a DCE model including 4 classes. Hybrid models using all available C-TTO observations produced a narrower range of values than the pits state anchoring approach.ConclusionsIn this article, we have presented an EQ-5D-Y value set that can be used for cost-utility analysis in Spain. The international EQ-5D-Y valuation protocol should be updated to include a different set of health states for the C-TTO experiment if researchers wish to use alternative anchoring approaches to the “pits state.”     

肿瘤标志物检验在胃癌诊断中的临床价值分析

目的分析探讨肿瘤标志物检验在胃癌诊断中的临床价值。方法选择在本院进行治疗的胃癌患者40例,将其列为观察组,选取体检健康者40例,将其列为普通组,具体的选择时间为2018年2月-2019年2月,对两组患者的CEA、CA72-4、CA19-9水平及阳性表达率进行比较分析。结果观察组患者CEA、CA72-4、CA19-9明显高于普通组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组患者的肿瘤标志物阳性表达率明显高于普通组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论肿瘤标志物在胃癌的诊断中具有非常重要的意义,肿瘤标志物对胃癌患者的诊断较为确切,利于患者的确诊及后期治疗,从而提高患者的生命及生活质量。     

穴位敷贴结合运动疗法对膝骨性关节炎的治疗价值评估

目的探讨穴位敷贴联合运动疗法对膝骨性关节炎的治疗效果。方法100例膝骨性关节炎患者,按照随机摸球法分为实验组与参照组,各50例。实验组应用穴位敷贴结合运动疗法治疗,参照组口服非甾体消炎止痛药治疗。比较两组治疗效果。结果实验组的优良率80.00%与参照组的78.00%比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论两种治疗方案都可实现治疗膝骨性关节炎的目的,穴位敷贴联合运动疗法治疗膝骨性关节炎具有成本低、价格便宜、经济实惠等优势。     

支原体肺炎患儿免疫功能变化的检测价值

目的分析免疫功能变化在支原体肺炎感染患儿中的检测价值。方法在2016年8月-2018年8月在医院接受诊治的114例支原体肺炎患儿与114例健康体检者作为本次研究。按根据是否属于支原体肺炎划分为试验组与常规组。试验组与常规组均接受免疫功能变化检测,总结并对比两组补体、免疫球蛋白水平、红细胞免疫水平以及T淋巴细胞亚群水平。结果试验组患儿的各项补体、免疫球蛋白水平相对于常规组而言均有明显数据差异(P<0.05);试验组患儿的各项细胞免疫水平相对于常规组而言均有明显数据差异(P<0.05);试验组患儿的各项T淋巴细胞亚群水平相对于常规组而言均有明显数据差异(P<0.05)。结论免疫功能变化在支原体肺炎感染患儿中的检测价值突出,可以作为患儿症状的检测与症状严重程度的判断依据。     

循证医学在内分泌学临床教学的应用研究

目的对于内分泌学临床教学工作中应用循证医学的具体方法以及应用价值进行分析。方法选取临床医学专业本科生70名进行分析,所选70名临床医学专业本科生通过随机法进行分组,其中40名临床医学专业本科生接受传统教学模式作为对照组,剩余30名临床医学专业本科生接受循证医学模式作为研究组,对比两组临床医学专业本科生的考试成绩。结果两组临床医学专业临床医生理论知识考试成绩对比不存在明显差异(P>0.05),两组临床医学专业临床医学生临床技能考试成绩对比差异明显(P<0.05)。结论临床内分泌教学工作中应用循证医学,能够显著提升临床医学专业临床医学生临床技能,应该给予大力的推广与应用。     

PBL教学法在临床实习护士查房中的应用

目的探讨PBL教学法在临床实习护士查房中的应用。方法选取2018年1月-2018年11月于本院实习的42例护士作为研究对象,按照查房方法的差异分为对照组(21例)与观察组(21例),对照组采用传统查房法,观察组采用PBL教学法。比较两组护理业务成绩、临床各项评价指标得分情况以及对护理查房业务的掌握程度。结果观察组临床护理业务兴趣、自主学习能力、学习效率、回答问题踊跃程度等各项指标得分高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组理论考试、实操训练、病历书写等临床各项评价指标得分高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组对护理查房业务的掌握程度为95.2%,高于对照组的61.9%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论在临床护理业务查房中应用教学法,建议采纳PBL教学法,在提高实习护士理论知识、提升业务水平和综合能力方面价值显著。     

The difficulty of diagnosing NCSE in clinical practice; external validation of the Salzburg criteria

To improve the diagnostic accuracy of electroencephalography (EEG) criteria for nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE), external validation of the recently proposed Salzburg criteria is paramount. We performed an external, retrospective, diagnostic accuracy study of the Salzburg criteria, using EEG recordings from patients with and without a clinical suspicion of having NCSE. Of the 191 EEG recordings, 12 (12%) was classified as an NCSE according to the reference standard. In the validation cohort, sensitivity was 67% and specificity was 89%. The positive predictive value was 47% and the negative predictive value was 95%. Ten patients in the control group (n = 93) were false positive, resulting in a specificity of 89.2%. The interrater agreement between the reference standards and between the scorers of the Salzburg criteria was moderate; disagreement occurred mainly in patients with an epileptic encephalopathy. The Salzburg criteria showed a lower diagnostic accuracy in our external validation study than in the original design, suggesting that they cannot replace the current practice of careful weighing of both clinical and EEG information on an individual basis.