Dataset Information

Development of a reliable clinical assessment tool for meningoencephalitis in dogs: The neurodisability scale.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Meningoencephalitis of unknown origin (MUO) comprises a group of debilitating inflammatory diseases affecting the central nervous system of dogs. Currently, no validated clinical scale is available for the objective assessment of MUO severity.

Objectives

Design a neurodisability scale (NDS) to grade clinical severity and determine its reliability and whether or not the score at presentation correlates with outcome.

Animals

One hundred dogs with MUO were included for retrospective review and 31 dogs were subsequently enrolled for prospective evaluation.

Methods

Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for 100 dogs diagnosed with MUO to identify the most frequent neurological examination findings. The NDS was designed based on these results and evaluated for prospective and retrospective use in a new population of MUO patients (n = 31) by different groups of independent blinded assessors, including calculation of interobserver agreement and association with outcome.

Results

The most common clinical signs in MUO patients were used to inform categories for scoring in the NDS: seizure activity, ambulatory status, posture and cerebral, cerebellar, brainstem, and visual functions. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for prospective use of the NDS was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-0.91) indicating good agreement, and moderate agreement was found between prospective and retrospective assessors (ICC, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83). No association was found between NDS score and long-term outcome.

Conclusions and clinical importance

The NDS is a novel clinical measure for objective assessment of neurological dysfunction and showed good reliability when used prospectively in MUO patients but, in this small population, no association with outcome could be identified.

SUBMITTER: Goncalves R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10229334 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May-Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development of a reliable clinical assessment tool for meningoencephalitis in dogs: The neurodisability scale.

Gonçalves Rita R Maddox Thomas W TW Phillipps Stephanie S Nagendran Aran A Cooper Camilla C Orlandi Rocio R Fentem Rory R Walmsley Gemma L GL

Journal of veterinary internal medicine 20230424 3

<h4>Background</h4>Meningoencephalitis of unknown origin (MUO) comprises a group of debilitating inflammatory diseases affecting the central nervous system of dogs. Currently, no validated clinical scale is available for the objective assessment of MUO severity.<h4>Objectives</h4>Design a neurodisability scale (NDS) to grade clinical severity and determine its reliability and whether or not the score at presentation correlates with outcome.<h4>Animals</h4>One hundred dogs with MUO were included ...[more]

PMID: 37092590

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to develop a multifactorial tool for assessment of sedation in dogs.MethodsFollowing a modified Delphi method, thirty-eight veterinary anaesthetists were contacted to describe the following levels of awareness: no-sedation, light, moderate, profound sedation and excitation. The answers were summarized in descriptors for each level. A questionnaire was created with all the variables obtained from the descriptors. The questionnaire was returned to the panel of anaesthetists to be used before and after real sedations in conjunction with the previous 5-point categorical scale. Data obtained were analysed using the classification-tree and random-forest methods.ResultsTwenty-three anaesthetists (60%) replied with descriptions. The descriptors and study variables were grouped in categories: state-of-mind, posture, movements, stimuli-response, behaviour, response-to-restraint, muscle tone, physiological data, facial-expression, eye position, eyelids, pupils, vocalization and feasibility-to-perform-intended-procedure. The anaesthetists returned 205 completed questionnaires. The levels of awareness reported by the anaesthetists were: no sedation in 92, mild (26), moderate (37) and profound in 50 cases. The classification-tree detected 6 main classifying variables: change in posture, response-to-restraint, head-elevation, response-to-toe-pinching, response-to-name, and movements. The random-forest found that the following variables: change in posture, response-to-restraint, head-elevation, response-to-name, movements, posture, response-to-toe-pinching, demeanour, righting-reflex and response-to-handclap, were classified correctly in 100% awake, 62% mild, 70% moderate and 86% of profound sedation cases.Discussion and conclusionThe questionnaire and methods developed here classified correctly the level of sedation in most cases. Further studies are needed to evaluate the validity of this tool in the clinical and research setting.

Project description:AIMS: Evaluation of the effectiveness of clinical teaching is an important contribution for the quality control of medical teaching. This should be evaluated using a reliable instrument in order to be able to both gauge the status quo and the effects of instruction. In the Stanford Faculty Development Program (SFDP), seven categories have proven to be appropriate: Establishing the Learning Climate, Controlling a Teaching Session, Communication of Goals, Encouraging Understanding and Retention, Evaluation, Feedback and Self-directed Learning. Since 1998, the SFDP26 questionnaire has established itself as an evaluation tool in English speaking countries. To date there is no equivalent German-language questionnaire available which evaluates the overall effectiveness of teaching. QUESTION: Development and theoretical testing of a German-language version of SFDP26 (SFDP26-German),Check the correlation of subscale of SFDPGerman against overall effectiveness of teaching. METHODS: 19 anaesthetists (7 female, 12 male) from the University of Lübeck were evaluated at the end of a teaching seminar on emergency medical care using SFDP-German. The sample consisted of 173 medical students (119 female (68.8%) and 54 male (31.2%), mostly from the fifth semester (6.6%) and sixth semester (80.3%). The mean age of the students was 23±3 years. RESULTS: The discriminatory power of all items ranged between good and excellent (r(it)=0.48-0.75). All subscales displayed good internal consistency (α=0.69-0.92) and significant positive inter-scale correlations (r=0.40-0.70). The subscales and "overall effectiveness of teaching" showed significant correlation, with the highest correlation for the subscale "communication of goals (p< 0.001; r = 0.61). CONCLUSION: The analysis of SFDP26-German confirms high internal consistency. Future research should investigate the effectiveness of the individual categories on the overall effectiveness of teaching and validate according to external criteria.

Project description:BackgroundOnly a small proportion of preclinical research (research performed in animal models prior to clinical trials in humans) translates into clinical benefit in humans. Possible reasons for the lack of translation of the results observed in preclinical research into human clinical benefit include the design, conduct, and reporting of preclinical studies. There is currently no formal domain-based assessment of the clinical relevance of preclinical research. To address this issue, we have developed a tool for the assessment of the clinical relevance of preclinical studies, with the intention of assessing the likelihood that therapeutic preclinical findings can be translated into improvement in the management of human diseases.MethodsWe searched the EQUATOR network for guidelines that describe the design, conduct, and reporting of preclinical research. We searched the references of these guidelines to identify further relevant publications and developed a set of domains and signalling questions. We then conducted a modified Delphi-consensus to refine and develop the tool. The Delphi panel members included specialists in evidence-based (preclinical) medicine specialists, methodologists, preclinical animal researchers, a veterinarian, and clinical researchers. A total of 20 Delphi-panel members completed the first round and 17 members from five countries completed all three rounds.ResultsThis tool has eight domains (construct validity, external validity, risk of bias, experimental design and data analysis plan, reproducibility and replicability of methods and results in the same model, research integrity, and research transparency) and a total of 28 signalling questions and provides a framework for researchers, journal editors, grant funders, and regulatory authorities to assess the potential clinical relevance of preclinical animal research.ConclusionWe have developed a tool to assess the clinical relevance of preclinical studies. This tool is currently being piloted.

Dataset Information

Development of a reliable clinical assessment tool for meningoencephalitis in dogs: The neurodisability scale.

Background

Objectives

Animals

Methods

Results

Conclusions and clinical importance

Publications

Development of a reliable clinical assessment tool for meningoencephalitis in dogs: The neurodisability scale.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets