| Literature DB >> 29166883 |
Benedikt Schoser1, Deborah A Bilder2, David Dimmock3, Digant Gupta4, Emma S James5, Suyash Prasad5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Humanistic burden considers the impact of an illness on a patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL), activities of daily living (ADL), caregiver health, and caregiver QoL. Humanistic burden also considers treatment satisfaction and adherence to treatment regimens. Pompe disease is an autosomal recessive, progressive, multisystemic neuromuscular disease. Approval of enzyme-replacement therapy (ERT) markedly improved prognosis for patients, but considerable morbidity and a substantial humanistic burden remain. This article characterizes the humanistic burden of Pompe disease through a systematic literature review.Entities:
Keywords: Caregiver burden; Daily living; Humanistic burden; Pompe; Quality of life
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29166883 PMCID: PMC5700516 DOI: 10.1186/s12883-017-0983-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Neurol ISSN: 1471-2377 Impact factor: 2.474
Description of outcome scales used in studies in this review
| Scale | Description | Range | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brief pain inventory (BPI) | Measures both the intensity of pain (sensory dimension) and interference of pain in the patient’s life (reactive dimension); it also queries the patient about pain relief, pain quality, and patient perception of the cause of pain | Scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine) | A higher score indicates greater pain |
| Pain interference score (PIS) | Average score of four items on the BPI devoted to severity of pain | Scores range from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes) | A higher score indicates greater interference of pain |
| Pain severity score (PSS) | Calculated on the basis of the average interference of pain (assessed on the BPI) with the following seven activities: general activities, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life | Scores range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine) | A higher score indicates greater pain |
| CarerQoL | Measure of care-related QoL in informal caregivers; comprising two parts: a description of the care situation on seven burden dimensions (CarerQoL-7D) and a valuation component in terms of general QoL using a Visual Analog Scale (CarerQol-VAS) | Assesses the overall well-being of the caregiver on a 0–10 scale, ranging from “completely unhappy” (0) to “completely happy” (10) | A higher score indicates greater happiness |
| Fatigue severity scale (FSS) | Self-reported nine-item questionnaire concerning the respondent’s fatigue; for example, how fatigue affects motivation, exercise, physical functioning, carrying out duties, interfering with work, family or social life | Participants grade each question on a Likert scale from 1 to 7, where 1 indicates strong disagreement and 7 indicates strong agreement | A higher score indicates more severe fatigue. Scores above 4 indicate significant fatigue and scores above 5 indicate severe fatigue |
| Hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) | 14-item self-rated scale. Seven of the items relate to anxiety and seven relate to depression. Each item is rated from 0 to 3, where 0 = not at all to 3 = most severe | Depression and anxiety scores can each range from 0 to 21 | Higher scores indicate greater anxiety or depression |
| Nottingham health profile (NHP) | Assesses subjective health status | Ranges from 0 (good) to 100 (poor) | Higher scores indicate poorer health status |
| Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) | 19 self-rated questions and five questions rated by the partner. The latter five questions are used for clinical information only and are not tabulated in the scoring of the PSQI. The 19 self-rated questions assess a wide variety of factors relating to sleep quality, including estimates of sleep duration and latency, and the frequency and severity of specific sleep-related problems | Global PSQI score is calculated from the responses given using a predefined algorithm, and ranges from 0 to 21 | A higher score indicates worse sleep quality |
| Rotterdam handicap scale (RHS) | Used to measure a patient’s functional ability and level of handicap, and can be used to monitor a patient’s status over time as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions | Scores per item range from 1 (‘unable to fulfill the task or activity’) to 4 (‘complete fulfillment of the task or activity’). The total score is derived by adding individual component scores and ranges from 9 (‘unable to fulfill any task/activity’) to 36 (‘able to fulfill all applicable tasks or activities’) | A higher score indicates better functional ability |
| Short-form-36 (SF-36) | Multidimensional HRQoL instrument comprising four physical health scales (physical functioning, role limitations due to physical problems, bodily pain, and general health perceptions) and four mental health scales (vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health). These eight scales can be aggregated into two summary measures: the physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary scores | Each scale is directly transformed into a 0–100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight | A lower score indicates greater disability (i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability) |
Fig. 1Flowchart of screening and identification process
Basic characteristics of studies reporting on humanistic burden of LOPD
| Publication | Quality rating | Study design | Geographic region | Population (sample size) | Disease severity | ERT status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Angelini 2009 [ | 5/9 | Prospective cohort | Italy | Symptomatic LOPD patients recruited from three collaborating University Centers ( | Symptomatic (≥2 on the Gardner-Medwin and Walton functional scale) | ERT |
| Aslan 2016 [ | 6/9 | Prospective cohort | Turkey | Subjects with a genetically confirmed diagnosis of LOPD ( | Not stated | ERT |
| Boentert 2015 [ | 7/9 | Cross-sectional | Germany | LOPD patients recruited from specialized outpatient clinics at three neuromuscular centers ( | Not stated (outpatients) | ERT |
| Freedman 2013 [ | 3/9 | Cross-sectional | Australia | LSD patients selected through purposive criterion sampling representing patients receiving ERT to treat a LSD, siblings and parents (9 parents, 4 patients, 3 siblings) | Not stated | ERT |
| Furusawa 2012 [ | NA | Case series | Japan | Patients with LOPD who had undergone ERT at the National Center Hospital ( | Wheelchair bound (n = 4) or able to stand for a few minutes (n = 1) | ERT |
| Güngör 2013 [ | 8/9 | Cross-sectional | Germany, Netherlands | LOPD patients recruited through the German patient organization or through Erasmus MC in The Netherlands ( | Full range of severities (mild to fully wheelchair/ventilator dependent) | ERT |
| Güngör 2016 [ | 3/9 | Prospective cohort | Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Netherlands, US, UK, others | Child and adult Pompe disease patients included through national support groups ( | Full range of severities (mild to fully wheelchair/ventilator dependent) | ERT-transition (minimum 6 months follow-up before and after ERT) |
| Hagemans 2007 [ | 5/9 | Cross-sectional | Multiple countries | LOPD patients recruited through patient organizations affiliated with the IPA ( | Full range of severities (mild to fully wheelchair/ventilator dependent) | No ERT |
| Hagemans 2004 [ | 5/9 | Cross-sectional | Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, the US | LOPD ( | Full range of severities (mild to fully wheelchair/ventilator dependent) | No ERT |
| Kanters 2013 [ | 5/9 | Cross-sectional | Netherlands | All patients at the Center for Lysosomal and Metabolic diseases in Rotterdam receiving informal care plus one caregiver per patient (67 patients; 67 informal caregivers) | Range | ERT |
| Karabul 2014a [ | 3/9 | Cross-sectional | UK | Adult LOPD patients ( | Not stated | ERT |
| Karabul 2014b [ | 6/9 | Cross-sectional | Germany | Adult LOPD patients ( | Not stated | ERT |
| Regnery 2012 [ | 5/9 | Prospective cohort | Germany | Adult LOPD patients from university-based centers ( | Various | ERT |
| Strothotte 2010 [ | 6/9 | Prospective cohort | Germany | LOPD patients treated in participating German university-based centers ( | Various | ERT |
| Van Capelle 2008 [ | 5/9 | Case series | Netherlands | Two severely affected LOPD patients and one moderately affected LOPD patient ( | Moderate ( | ERT |
| van der Meijden 2015 [ | 7/9 | Prospective cohort | Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Netherlands, US, UK, others | Child and adult Pompe disease patients included through national support groups ( | Full range of severities (mild to fully wheelchair/ventilator dependent) | ERT-transition |
| van der Ploeg 2010 [ | 7/9 | RCT | US and Europe (eight centers) | LOPD patients, 8 years of age or older, ambulatory, and free of invasive ventilation ( | Range (excluded if invasive ventilation or if required noninvasive ventilation while awake and upright) | ERT |
‘ERT-transition’ studies refer to those initiated before the approval of ERT but continuing into the post-ERT era
Quality rating refers to a quality score assigned to each publication considering characteristics that could introduce bias, using the following tools: 1) Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies and case-control studies [22]; 2) Adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cross-sectional studies [22]; 3) AMSTAR measurement tool for reviews [23]; 4) Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool for randomized controlled trials [24]. The maximum score for the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale is 9
IPA: International Pompe Association; LOPD: Late-onset Pompe disease; LSD: Lysosomal storage disorders; MC: Medical center; RCT: Randomized controlled trial
Fig. 2Inter-relationships between clinical, humanistic and economic burden parameters in LOPD patients receiving ERT