Tag: statistics

BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2025 Apr 7;10(1):e002036. doi: 10.1136/bmjophth-2024-002036.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) registers enable population-based studies to monitor ROP screening programmes to improve their effectiveness. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of ROP and the coverage of screening in a South African cohort using a prospective ROP South African (ROPSA) register.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Infants born from 1 May 2022 to 31 January 2023 and screened prospectively for ROP at five neonatal intensive care units in Cape Town were included. The screening criteria were a gestational age (GA) <32 weeks or birth weight (BW) <1250 g. Data were extracted from the ROPSA register and analysed.

RESULTS: 696 of 1154 (60.3%) eligible infants were screened, almost half of whom (45.7%) did not complete screening. ROP was detected in 220 infants (31.6%, 95% CI 28.3% to 35.3%), 7 (1.0%) of whom required treatment. Infants with incomplete screening had a lower mean GA than those who completed screening; 28.7 (SD 1.6, range 25-33) and 29.1 (SD 1.7, range 24-36) weeks, respectively (p=0.004) and a lower mean BW; 1048 (SD 203, range 650-1690) g and 1108.5 (SD 227, range 640-1840) g, respectively (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Data from the ROPSA register on the frequency of any ROP and treatment-requiring ROP may be biased due to low screening coverage and high incomplete screening. Reasons need to be explored and corrective interventions initiated. The ROPSA register will enable the impact of these interventions to be monitored. The findings of this study will contribute to the ongoing revision of South African national ROP screening guidelines.

PMID:40194866 | DOI:10.1136/bmjophth-2024-002036

J Dent Hyg. 2025 Apr;99(2):9-25.

ABSTRACT

Purpose The World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions introduced a new framework for categorizing periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions in 2017. The purpose of this study was to investigate the current implementation practice and factors impacting implementation of the 2017 Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases by clinical dental hygienists.Methods Survey research was conducted in an online format with a non-probability sample of clinical dental hygienists recruited via social media and snowball sampling (n= 255). Components of the survey included personal, environmental, and behavioral factors along with intention to implement the classification of periodontal staging and grading system into patient care. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression.Results The survey completion rate was 71% (n=181). Environmental factors (β=.352, p<.001) and personal factors (β=.469, p<.001) were positively associated with the intention to implement the 2017 periodontal disease classification system. In contrast, behavioral factors (β=.011, p=.889) and highest degree earned (β=.079, p=.151) were not significant predictors. For the intention to attend continuing education courses on the new classification system, both behavioral factors (β=.388, p<.001) and personal factors (β=.299, p=.003) were significant. However, environmental factors (β=-.048, p=.535), years in practice (β=-.041, p=.506), and familiarity (β=.066, p=.402) were not significant predictors.Conclusion Results demonstrated that both environmental and personal factors significantly influenced the intention to implement the 2017 periodontal disease classification system among clinical dental hygienists. To enhance integration, efforts should be made to focus on improving personal motivation and addressing the environmental/workplace factors.

PMID:40194864

J Dent Hyg. 2025 Apr;99(2):37-47.

ABSTRACT

Purpose Dental hygienists’ knowledge and application of clear communication techniques are critical due to their role as primary providers of education about preventive regimens. The purpose of this study was to obtain information about dental hygiene students’ perceived education regarding recommended communication techniques and their intent to use these techniques in practice.Methods A national online survey was designed by the University of Maryland and structured by the American Dental Association’s Council on Advocacy for Access and Prevention (CAAP). The survey was distributed by the American Dental Hygienists’ Association (ADHA) in 2019 to 9533 student email addresses. The survey included student demographics, the recommended communication techniques they were exposed to, when and where they were assessed, whether they had heard of the term health literacy, and their intent to use the communication techniques once in clinical practice. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and analysis of variance. Significance was set at p< 0.05.Results A total of 235 surveys were returned for a 2.5% response rate. The majority were female (95.7%), white (81.7%) and born in the United States (89.8%). Nearly a third (28.1%) were in baccalaureate programs and over half (59.1%) were in associate degree programs. The most frequently reported method used to educate students about provider-patient communication techniques was lectures (88.9%). Respondents were more likely to report having knowledge regarding the use of simple language (98.3%) than asking the patient to repeat back the information or instructions (87.7%). Respondents had greater confidence (82.1%) and intention to use simple language (92.8%) than confidence to ask patients to repeat back information (73.2%) or intention to do so in the future (67.7%) The majority (58.3%) reported being evaluated on communication skills both in the classroom and clinic setting.Conclusions Results of this survey, although non-representative of all dental hygiene students, suggest a need for increased classroom and clinic use of recommended communication techniques in dental hygiene education programs. Dental hygiene graduates must understand the use of recommended communication techniques to reduce misinformation about oral health and increase patients’ knowledge and understanding about preventing oral diseases.

PMID:40194863

J Dent Hyg. 2025 Apr;99(2):26-36.

ABSTRACT

Purpose The popularity of disposable safety syringes has grown because of their established safety record. Previous studies on local anesthetic syringes have mainly concentrated on safety features and the prevention of needlestick injuries, often neglecting the preferences of practitioners. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the preferences of dental hygiene students and faculty for traditional metal syringes compared to disposable safety syringes.Methods An 11-item questionnaire was distributed to a convenience sample of 61 dental hygiene students and 3 faculty members in a pain management course. The questionnaires were administered after the participants’ first exposure to local anesthetic administration on a mannequin and after their final exposure on a live patient to assess any changes in preferences. The post-questionnaire included the same 11 questions, along with an open-ended question inviting participants to share their final thoughts. Data were collected and entered into an Excel spreadsheet for descriptive statistics and inductive content analysisResults The response rate was 93.44% (n=57) for the initial questionnaire and 90.16% (n=55) for the final questionnaire administered to the dental hygiene students. All of the faculty members (n=3) completed both questionnaires. Participants preferred the traditional syringe over the disposable safety syringe for ease of use/comfort and control of the apparatus during set up, aspiration, and injection. However, preferences for disposable safety syringes were indicated in the responses related to syringe break down and clean-up.Conclusion This study assessed the preferences of dental hygiene students and faculty for traditional metal versus disposable safety syringes, revealing a clear preference for the former despite some limitations. Understanding how syringe design affects user comfort and safety could enhance disposable syringe technology and its adoption.

PMID:40194862

Neurology. 2025 Apr 8;104(7_Supplement_1):4269. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000211560. Epub 2025 Apr 7.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Objectives of this study are to retrospectively analyze Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) and associated costs in 59 patients diagnosed with SPSD at a large academic center to identify areas for interventions.

BACKGROUND: Stiff Person Syndrome Spectrum Disorder (SPSD) is a rare autoimmune disorder characterized by progressive muscle stiffness and painful spasms.

DESIGN/METHODS: We queried Health Data Compass (HDC), an electronic health data repository for a large academic healthcare system, from 2012 through 2022 for all patients ≥ 18-year-old with ICD-10 codes pertaining to SPSD in a recent epidemiology study to define incidence and prevalence of SPSD (Neurology, in press). In this current study, we then used the HDC database in this well-defined SPSD cohort to capture electronic health records from a large academic health system and claims data from the Colorado All Payers Claim Database to further define HCRU in this population.

RESULTS: 273 patients met the initial inclusion criteria using ICD-10 codes; 59 were confirmed to have SPSD via chart review. Based on our cohort of 59 patients, the mean age of patients was 49.7 years (SD=12.9), 59.3% were female, and 59.3% were antibody-positive. 81.4% self-identified as White, 8.5% Black, 1.2% American Indian or Alaskan Native, and 6.8 % other. 91.5% self-reported as non-Hispanic. 72.9% had ≥ 1 electromyography/nerve conduction study and 81.3% had ≥ 1 brain magnetic resonance image in our system. Additional data collected includes hospitalizations, emergency room and outpatient visits, laboratory and radiology services, and pharmacy related services to evaluate all-cause and SPSD related HCRU and costs.

CONCLUSIONS: Using a well-defined, population-based cohort, we can explore HCRU patterns for patients with SPSD. Understanding the true disease burden of SPSD is fundamental to ensuring optimal patient care, allocating appropriate system resources, and defining standards of care for this rare disease. Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff. Disclosure: Dr. Lowe has nothing to disclose. Mr. Gutierrez has nothing to disclose. Dr. Barlev has received personal compensation for serving as an employee of Kyverna. Dr. Crane has nothing to disclose. Mr. Engebretson has nothing to disclose. Stefan Sillau has nothing to disclose. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for Bristol Meyers Squibb. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Novartis. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as a Consultant for PhRMA Foundation. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as a Consultant for Genentech. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for TG Therapeutics. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for MJH Lifesciences. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for Sanofi. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for EMD Serono. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Amgen. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Anylam . Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Applied Patient Experience. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Sanofi-Genzyme. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Amgen. Dr. Nair has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as an officer or member of the Board of Directors for ICER. The institution of Dr. Nair has received research support from Genentech. The institution of Dr. Nair has received research support from Novartis. The institution of Dr. Nair has received research support from Genentech. The institution of Dr. Nair has received research support from Phrma Foundation. The institution of Dr. Nair has received research support from Bristol Meyers Squibb. The institution of Dr. Nair has received research support from Novartis. The institution of Dr. Nair has received research support from NINDS. The institution of Dr. Nair has received research support from Sanofi Genzyme. The institution of Dr. Nair has received research support from Kyverna Therapeutcis. Dr. Nair has a non-compensated relationship as a Board Member with Center for Improving Value in Healthcare that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Carlson has received research support from Horizon Therapeutics (Amgen). The institution of Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for Genentech. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as a Consultant for Alexion. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $0-$499 for serving as a Consultant for UCB. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $0-$499 for serving as a Consultant for EMD Serono. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for Kyverna . Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Genentech. Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Alexion. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Genentech. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Kyverna. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Horizon/Amgen. Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as an Expert Witness for Sands Anderson PC. Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as an Expert Witness for Joe Jones Law Firm. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received research support from Rocky Mountain MS Center. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received research support from Novartis. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received research support from Abbvie. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received research support from Roche/Genentech. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received research support from NYU. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received research support from Anokion. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received research support from UCB . The institution of Dr. Piquet has received research support from Foundation for Sarcoidosis. The institution of Dr. Piquet has received research support from Kyverna . Dr. Piquet has received publishing royalties from a publication relating to health care. Dr. Piquet has received publishing royalties from a publication relating to health care. Dr. Piquet has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as a Litigative Consultant with US-Dept HHS/DICP. Dr. Piquet has a non-compensated relationship as a Medical Advisory Board Member with Autoimmune Encephalitis Alliance (AEA) that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Piquet has a non-compensated relationship as a Medical Advisory Board Member with Stiff Person Syndrome Research Foundation (SPSRF) that is relevant to AAN interests or activities.

PMID:40194238 | DOI:10.1212/WNL.0000000000211560

Neurology. 2025 Apr 8;104(7_Supplement_1):4274. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000211564. Epub 2025 Apr 7.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the frequency of quality care in moderate-advanced dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), including in individuals with and without specialty care.

BACKGROUND: DLB is a common degenerative dementia, however the frequency of high-quality care is unknown.

DESIGN/METHODS: Dyads of moderate-advanced DLB patients and their caregivers were recruited from DLB Centers of Excellence, advocacy organizations, or research registries. Caregivers completed questionnaires regarding demographics, healthcare, and ancillary referrals. Descriptive statistics report the frequency of care aligning with dementia and parkinsonism quality measures. Secondary analyses compared specialty and non-specialty care via chi-square and t-tests. P-values were adjusted for multiple testing.

RESULTS: Of 189 dyads, patients were on average 75±8 years-old (77.8% male, 95.2% White, average time since diagnosis 3.2 ± 3.1 years). Forty percent of participants reported care from a movement or dementia specialist, 34% from a DLB specialist, and 51% from general neurology. 132 (69.8%) patients were taking a cholinesterase inhibitor. The average Anticholinergic Burden (ACB) score was 2.0±2.0. Of 84 patients taking antipsychotic medications, 74 (39.2%) were taking preferred antipsychotics and 10 (5.3%) were taking non-preferred antipsychotics. Eighty-eight participants (46.6%) reported rehabilitation (PT/OT/SLP) referrals, 49 (25.9%) social work referrals, 17 (9%) palliative care, and 22 (11.6%) hospice. There were no differences in cholinesterase inhibitor use (p=0.061), mean ACB score (p=0.348), use of preferred (p=0.560) or non-preferred (p=0.230) antipsychotics, rehabilitation referrals (p=0.719), or hospice referrals (p=0.928) between specialty and non-specialty cohorts. Individuals receiving specialty care were less likely to receive social work (13.9% vs. 34%), p=0.001) and palliative care (3.8% vs. 12.7%, p=0.034) referrals.

CONCLUSIONS: Most individuals with moderate-advanced DLB observed received quality care relating to medications and rehabilitation referrals, however frequency of social work and palliative care referrals were low across both specialty and non-specialty cohorts. There is a need to increase availability of these services and connect individuals with DLB to these supports. Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff. Disclosure: Dr. Burke has nothing to disclose. Dr. Li has nothing to disclose. Mrs. Jury has nothing to disclose. Dr. Galvin has received personal compensation in the range of $100,000-$499,999 for serving as a Consultant for Cognivue. Dr. Galvin has received personal compensation in the range of $50,000-$99,999 for serving as a Consultant for Biogen. Dr. Galvin has received personal compensation in the range of $50,000-$99,999 for serving as a Consultant for Eisai. Dr. Galvin has received personal compensation in the range of $50,000-$99,999 for serving as a Consultant for Eli Lilly. Dr. Galvin has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as a Consultant for GE Healthcare. Dr. Galvin has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as a Consultant for Roche. Dr. Galvin has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for PassageBio. The institution of Dr. Galvin has received research support from National Institutes of Health. Dr. Galvin has received intellectual property interests from a discovery or technology relating to health care. Dr. Galvin has a non-compensated relationship as a Board of Directors with Alzheimer Association Southeast Florida Chapter that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Galvin has a non-compensated relationship as a Board of Directors with Lewy Body Dementia Association that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Galvin has a non-compensated relationship as a Board of Directors with Lewy Body Dementia Resource Center that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. The institution of Dr. Fields has received research support from National Institutes of Health. The institution of Dr. Fields has received research support from Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Mrs. Taylor has received personal compensation for serving as an employee of Lewy Body Dementia Association. The institution of Dr. Armstrong has received research support from National Institute of Aging. The institution of Dr. Armstrong has received research support from Florida Department of Health. The institution of Dr. Armstrong has received research support from Lewy Body Dementia Association. Dr. Armstrong has received research support from Parkinson Foundation. Dr. Armstrong has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a DSMB member with Alzheimer’s Clinical Trials Consortium. Dr. Armstrong has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a DSMB member with Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study. Dr. Armstrong has a non-compensated relationship as a Member, Scientific Advisory Council with Lewy Body Dementia Association that is relevant to AAN interests or activities.

PMID:40194235 | DOI:10.1212/WNL.0000000000211564

Neurology. 2025 Apr 8;104(7_Supplement_1):4279. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000211566. Epub 2025 Apr 7.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that developing standardized training for the neurological coma examination will ensure medical trainees are effectively taught the necessary skills to perform and interpret physical examinations on comatose patients.

BACKGROUND: It has been shown that medical trainees lack confidence in their physical examination skills and understanding the significance of their findings.

DESIGN/METHODS: Twenty-eight third and fourth-year medical students rotating in the Neuro-intensive care unit (NICU) participated in a one-hour coma examination training consisting of a lecture and skills demonstration led by a neurocritical care attending. Students completed an anonymous pre/post-session survey assessing their confidence and comfortability in performing a coma examination. Survey answer options were designed on a Likert scale from 1-5 with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree.” Statistical analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon signed ranks test.

RESULTS: There were statistically significant increases in self-rated comfort level and clinical competency in all areas following the training. Question 9 (“I am able to teach another student how to complete a comprehensive neurological physical examination of a comatose patient”) and question 2 (“I am able to determine a Glasgow coma score for a comatose patient”) showed the greatest improvement from pre- to post-survey responses (p-value: <0.001, Wilcoxon signed ranks test). Half of respondents answered 5 (“strongly agree”) to question 12 (“The coma clinical skills workshop increased my confidence in my ability to perform a comprehensive neurological physical examination on a comatose patient”).

CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that standardized neurological coma examination training in medical education is an effective teaching method. This approach should be further explored by expanding the training to include more students and learner types such as residents and nurses. Long-term efficacy may need to be determined through a follow-up survey of students at the end of their medical education after working in other ICU settings. Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff. Disclosure: Ms. Streveler has nothing to disclose. Ms. Lauzier has nothing to disclose. Dr. Muzammil has nothing to disclose. Dr. Mohamed has nothing to disclose. Scott Millis has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as an Editor, Associate Editor, or Editorial Advisory Board Member for Taylor & Francis. The institution of Scott Millis has received research support from NIH & NIDILRR. Dr. Zutshi has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Xenon pharmaceuticals. An immediate family member of Dr. Zutshi has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Boston Scientific. The institution of Dr. Zutshi has received research support from UCB Pharmaceuticals.

PMID:40194233 | DOI:10.1212/WNL.0000000000211566

Neurology. 2025 Apr 8;104(7_Supplement_1):4224. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000211532. Epub 2025 Apr 7.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To conduct interim analyses to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary impact of a 6-session, in-person, PT-delivered BAR program for patients with migraine.

BACKGROUND: There are accessibility barriers to biofeedback-assisted relaxation (BAR), a Grade A evidence-based migraine preventive treatment, typically delivered by psychologists. Despite having BAR training for other conditions, physical therapists (PTs) do not traditionally deliver BAR for migraine.

DESIGN/METHODS: We conducted a randomized, single-blinded parallel study comparing BAR to Enhanced Usual Care (EUC) in patients with migraine. Between in-person sessions, participants were asked to practice daily. EUC participants were given educational handouts. Both groups completed a daily electronic headache diary. Outcome measures included migraine-related quality of life (MSQv2) and migraine-related disability (MIDAS).

RESULTS: Fifty participants enrolled (BAR=25, EUC=25). The majority (81.0%, 17/21 BAR; 79.2%, 19/24 EUC) agreed/strongly agreed that the electronic headache diary was easy to understand. BAR feasibility data (n=19) showed 89.5% attended 4+ sessions. BAR practice data (n=18) showed 66.7% reported daily practice, and 55.6% reported 10+ minutes of practice/session. Although not statistically significant, the BAR group had greater improvements in each MSQv2 subdomain compared to EUC (Role Function-Restrictive BAR=14.2 vs EUC=6.0, Role Function Preventive BAR=8.3 vs EUC=4.8, Emotional Function BAR=16.8 vs EUC=14.2). The BAR group had a greater mean change in MIDAS compared to EUC (-27.4 + 31.5 vs -5.48 + 22.0; P=0.010).

CONCLUSIONS: Of the patients with migraine who did PT-delivered BAR, the majority practiced daily (up to 10+ minutes/day), and there were clinically significant improvements in migraine-related disability compared to EUC. Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff. Disclosure: The institution of Dr. Minen has received research support from NIH. Dr. Minen has received intellectual property interests from a discovery or technology relating to health care. Dr. Minen has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a First Contact-Primary Care Advisory Board Member with American Headache Society . Dr. Minen has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for PCORI grant on migraine evidence based map for stakeholders with ECRI . Miss Dorf has nothing to disclose. Ms. George has nothing to disclose. The institution of Dr. Fanning has received research support from Abbvie. The institution of Dr. Fanning has received research support from NYC Langone Health . The institution of Dr. Fanning has received research support from Uiversity of SC – Irvine. The institution of Dr. Fanning has received research support from AESARA. Ryan Bostic has received personal compensation in the range of $50,000-$99,999 for serving as a Consultant for MIST Research. Mr. Schultz has nothing to disclose.

PMID:40194229 | DOI:10.1212/WNL.0000000000211532

Neurology. 2025 Apr 8;104(7_Supplement_1):4223. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000211531. Epub 2025 Apr 7.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze the rates of discontinuation and nonpublication in clinical trials related to gliomas, highlighting factors that contribute to these issues.

BACKGROUND: Gliomas are complex tumors that present significant challenges in research and treatment. Despite numerous clinical trials, a substantial number are discontinued or unpublished, impacting the overall knowledge base and treatment strategies for glioma patients.

DESIGN/METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive analysis using data extracted from the ClinicalTrials.gov database. A total of 1,441 trials were identified and categorized based on their completion and publication status. We examined various trial characteristics, including participant demographics, enrollment size, study design, and funding sources. Statistical regression models were employed to identify predictors of trial discontinuation and nonpublication.

RESULTS: Among the identified trials, 1,092 (75.8%) were completed, while 349 (24.2%) were discontinued. Of the completed trials, 641 (44.5%) were published. Larger enrollment sizes and multi-center designs significantly reduced the likelihood of discontinuation (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.215; p < 0.001) and nonpublication (OR = 0.481; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: The high rates of discontinuation and nonpublication in glioma trials underscore the need for improved research methodologies. Focusing on larger, multi-center collaborations could enhance trial completion and publication rates, ultimately benefiting glioma research and patient outcomes. Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff. Disclosure: Dr. Arafeh has nothing to disclose. Dr. Zakria has nothing to disclose. Ms. G Hamam has nothing to disclose. Dr. Hassan has nothing to disclose. Dr. Alajarmeh has nothing to disclose. Dr. Abed has nothing to disclose. Mr. Alsalhen has nothing to disclose.

PMID:40194228 | DOI:10.1212/WNL.0000000000211531

Neurology. 2025 Apr 8;104(7_Supplement_1):4239. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000211541. Epub 2025 Apr 7.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the interaction between intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and transfer strategies (mothership vs. transfer) on outcomes following endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for vertebrobasilar artery occlusions (VBAOs).

BACKGROUND: EVT has become a standard intervention for acute ischemic stroke caused by VBAOs.

DESIGN/METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on VBAO patients who underwent EVT. Patients were categorized based on treatment type: IVT followed by EVT or EVT alone. Transfer strategies were classified as mothership or transfer. The primary outcomes were modified Rankin Scale (mRS≤3) and mortality at 90 days.

RESULTS: Among 175 patients, the median age was 67 years with 54.9% males. Among these, 33 patients (18.9%) received IVT before EVT, while 142 (81.1%) underwent EVT alone. Among all patients, 48 (27.4%) presented as mothership, and 127 (72.6%) were transfers. In bridging IVT cohort, mRS≤ 3 at 90 days was observed in 58.3% of the mothership group, a higher rate compared to 38.9% in the transfer group. For EVT alone cohort, the mothership group demonstrated a lower rate of mRS≤ 3 at 90 days (35.3%) compared to transfer (45.8%). The mothership group in the IVT cohort had a 90-day mortality rate of 41.7% compared to 50.0% in the transfer group, while for patients undergoing EVT alone, the mothership group had a mortality rate of 52.9% versus 43.8% in the transfer group. Interaction analysis indicated that the mothership strategy may have more pronounced benefits for IVT-refractory patients; however, the overall interaction effect was not statistically significant (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS: In patients with VBAOs undergoing EVT, bridging IVT showed better clinical outcomes in the mothership group compared to those transferred from outside hospitals, particularly in contrast to the EVT-alone group. These findings suggest that the mothership strategy may benefit patients who are potentially IVT-refractory. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these results. Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff. Disclosure: Mr. Doheim has nothing to disclose. Dr. Rios Rocha has nothing to disclose. Abdullah Al Qudah has nothing to disclose. Miss Almast has nothing to disclose. Dr. Starr has nothing to disclose. The institution of Dr. Rocha has received research support from NIH. Dr. Bhatt has nothing to disclose. Dr. Correia Lima has nothing to disclose. Dr. Gross has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as a Consultant for Medtronic. Dr. Gross has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for Microvention. Dr. Gross has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as an Editor, Associate Editor, or Editorial Advisory Board Member for AHA. Dr. Lang has nothing to disclose. Dr. Nogueira has received personal compensation in the range of $50,000-$99,999 for serving as a Consultant for for advisory roles with Anaconda, Biogen, Cerenovus, Genentech, Hybernia, Imperative Care, Medtronic, Phenox, Philips, Prolong Pharmaceuticals, Stryker Neurovascular, Shanghai Wallaby, and Synchron (consulting fees) as well as for advisory roles with Astrocyte, Brainomix, Cerebrotech, Ceretrieve, Corindus Vascular Robotics, Vesalio, Viz-AI, RapidPulse and Perfuze ( stock options). Dr. Nogueira has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as an Expert Witness for Law Firms. Dr. Nogueira has received stock or an ownership interest from Viz-AI, Perfuze, Cerebrotech, Reist/Q’Apel Medical, Truvic, and Viseon. The institution of Dr. Nogueira has received research support from Cerenovus. Dr. Al-Bayati has nothing to disclose.

PMID:40194219 | DOI:10.1212/WNL.0000000000211541