Cargando…

A patient-initiated treatment model for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: To test, in a two-arm, single center, superiority, randomized controlled trial, the effectiveness of and costs associated with a patient-initiated treatment model for people with hemifacial spasm (HFS) and blepharospasm (BEB) in comparison to usual care. METHODS: One hundred and thirty p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lawes-Wickwar, Sadie, McBain, Hayley, Brini, Stefano, Hirani, Shashivadan P., Hurt, Catherine S., Flood, Chris, Dunlop, Nicola, Solly, Dianne, Crampton, Bridget, Newman, Stanton P., Ezra, Daniel G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8928587/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35300599
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-022-02603-7
_version_ 1784670673460789248
author Lawes-Wickwar, Sadie
McBain, Hayley
Brini, Stefano
Hirani, Shashivadan P.
Hurt, Catherine S.
Flood, Chris
Dunlop, Nicola
Solly, Dianne
Crampton, Bridget
Newman, Stanton P.
Ezra, Daniel G.
author_facet Lawes-Wickwar, Sadie
McBain, Hayley
Brini, Stefano
Hirani, Shashivadan P.
Hurt, Catherine S.
Flood, Chris
Dunlop, Nicola
Solly, Dianne
Crampton, Bridget
Newman, Stanton P.
Ezra, Daniel G.
author_sort Lawes-Wickwar, Sadie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To test, in a two-arm, single center, superiority, randomized controlled trial, the effectiveness of and costs associated with a patient-initiated treatment model for people with hemifacial spasm (HFS) and blepharospasm (BEB) in comparison to usual care. METHODS: One hundred and thirty patients with HFS or BEB, aged 18 years or over, were recruited from a nurse-led botulinum toxin type A clinic at an eye hospital in the United Kingdom (UK), completed baseline measures and were randomized (1:1). The intervention group determined their own botulinum toxin type A (BoNT/A) treatment schedule during the trial period (9 months) and received an information leaflet with a “hotline” number to book an appointment. Usual care appointments were scheduled by treating clinicians. Data analysts were blind to study group. The primary outcomes were disease severity and functional disability, as measured by the Jankovic Rating Scale and Blepharospasm Disability Index, respectively. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, anxiety and depression, satisfaction with care, confidence in the service, economic costs and employment days lost. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were randomized to each group. The intervention demonstrated no statistically significant difference to usual care for any of primary outcomes. On secondary outcomes the levels of anxiety differed significantly (F(2, 142.39) = 1.65, p = 0.02), with the intervention arm exhibiting a decrease and the control arm an increase (Hedges’ g = − 0.26 [99% CI -0.83, 0.32]). No other statistically significant differences were found for secondary outcomes. Overall healthcare costs and costs to the patient were on average £198.95 less (95% CI -£256.76, £654.67; p = 0.10) per participant for those in the intervention compared to usual care, although this finding was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: We did not observe differences between the patient-initiated treatment model and usual care for people with BEB or HFS, on any primary outcome measure, quality of life, or depression. The patient-initiated treatment model may, however, have the potential to save healthcare costs and reduce anxiety. Patients using this new model were also equally as satisfied in the service and confident in their care as those receiving treatment as usual. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT02577224, 16th October 2015. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12883-022-02603-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8928587
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89285872022-03-23 A patient-initiated treatment model for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm: a randomized controlled trial Lawes-Wickwar, Sadie McBain, Hayley Brini, Stefano Hirani, Shashivadan P. Hurt, Catherine S. Flood, Chris Dunlop, Nicola Solly, Dianne Crampton, Bridget Newman, Stanton P. Ezra, Daniel G. BMC Neurol Research Article BACKGROUND: To test, in a two-arm, single center, superiority, randomized controlled trial, the effectiveness of and costs associated with a patient-initiated treatment model for people with hemifacial spasm (HFS) and blepharospasm (BEB) in comparison to usual care. METHODS: One hundred and thirty patients with HFS or BEB, aged 18 years or over, were recruited from a nurse-led botulinum toxin type A clinic at an eye hospital in the United Kingdom (UK), completed baseline measures and were randomized (1:1). The intervention group determined their own botulinum toxin type A (BoNT/A) treatment schedule during the trial period (9 months) and received an information leaflet with a “hotline” number to book an appointment. Usual care appointments were scheduled by treating clinicians. Data analysts were blind to study group. The primary outcomes were disease severity and functional disability, as measured by the Jankovic Rating Scale and Blepharospasm Disability Index, respectively. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, anxiety and depression, satisfaction with care, confidence in the service, economic costs and employment days lost. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were randomized to each group. The intervention demonstrated no statistically significant difference to usual care for any of primary outcomes. On secondary outcomes the levels of anxiety differed significantly (F(2, 142.39) = 1.65, p = 0.02), with the intervention arm exhibiting a decrease and the control arm an increase (Hedges’ g = − 0.26 [99% CI -0.83, 0.32]). No other statistically significant differences were found for secondary outcomes. Overall healthcare costs and costs to the patient were on average £198.95 less (95% CI -£256.76, £654.67; p = 0.10) per participant for those in the intervention compared to usual care, although this finding was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: We did not observe differences between the patient-initiated treatment model and usual care for people with BEB or HFS, on any primary outcome measure, quality of life, or depression. The patient-initiated treatment model may, however, have the potential to save healthcare costs and reduce anxiety. Patients using this new model were also equally as satisfied in the service and confident in their care as those receiving treatment as usual. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ID NCT02577224, 16th October 2015. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12883-022-02603-7. BioMed Central 2022-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8928587/ /pubmed/35300599 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-022-02603-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Lawes-Wickwar, Sadie
McBain, Hayley
Brini, Stefano
Hirani, Shashivadan P.
Hurt, Catherine S.
Flood, Chris
Dunlop, Nicola
Solly, Dianne
Crampton, Bridget
Newman, Stanton P.
Ezra, Daniel G.
A patient-initiated treatment model for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm: a randomized controlled trial
title A patient-initiated treatment model for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm: a randomized controlled trial
title_full A patient-initiated treatment model for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm: a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr A patient-initiated treatment model for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm: a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed A patient-initiated treatment model for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm: a randomized controlled trial
title_short A patient-initiated treatment model for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm: a randomized controlled trial
title_sort patient-initiated treatment model for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm: a randomized controlled trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8928587/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35300599
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-022-02603-7
work_keys_str_mv AT laweswickwarsadie apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT mcbainhayley apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT brinistefano apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hiranishashivadanp apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hurtcatherines apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT floodchris apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT dunlopnicola apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT sollydianne apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT cramptonbridget apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT newmanstantonp apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT ezradanielg apatientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT laweswickwarsadie patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT mcbainhayley patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT brinistefano patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hiranishashivadanp patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hurtcatherines patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT floodchris patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT dunlopnicola patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT sollydianne patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT cramptonbridget patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT newmanstantonp patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT ezradanielg patientinitiatedtreatmentmodelforblepharospasmandhemifacialspasmarandomizedcontrolledtrial