Evaluation of a Standardized Strategy for Uveitis Etiological Diagnosis (ULISSE)

This study is ongoing, but not recruiting participants.
Sponsor:
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Hospices Civils de Lyon
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT01162070
First received: July 12, 2010
Last updated: October 7, 2013
Last verified: October 2013

July 12, 2010
October 7, 2013
June 2010
July 2014   (final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
The primary outcome is the percentage of patients having an etiological diagnosis 6 months after the beginning of the study for both strategies. [ Time Frame: 6 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
Note: Only diagnoses made at the end of the standardized strategy will be numbered in this arm of the study; all diagnoses made after by the free authorized examinations in this same arm will lead to standardized strategy failure.
Same as current
Complete list of historical versions of study NCT01162070 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site
  • Clinical criteria concerning the standardized strategy [ Time Frame: 6 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    • Percentage of patients having an established etiological diagnosis at the end of the first diagnostic stage and at the end of the second diagnostic stage. (Second or third-line assessment).
    • Ratio of the standardized strategy's first stage examinations having contributed to the etiological diagnosis.
    • Ratio of the standardized strategy's second stage examinations, directed by the anatomo-clinical type of the uveitis (Second or third-line assessment) having contributed to an etiological diagnosis.
    • Ratio of free complementary examinations having contributed to an etiological diagnosis.
  • Clinical criteria concerning the free strategy [ Time Frame: 6 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    • Description and ratio of the examinations that have not allowed the doctor to make an etiological diagnosis.
    • Description and ratio of the complementary examinations not included in the standardized strategy.
  • The average cost of economic criteria for each strategy. [ Time Frame: 12 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    • For each patient: The standardized strategy's average cost of diagnosis distinguishing between first diagnostic stage costs and second diagnostic stage costs (made up of the second or third-line assessment directed by the anotomo-clinical type of the uveitis).
    • Average cost of the complementary examinations not included in the standardized strategy but allowed at the end of it (subsequent free assessment).
    • Average cost for each patient of the whole free strategy.
  • Quality of life criteria [ Time Frame: : 6 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

    - Quality of life, estimated with the standard quality of life questionnaire (SF-36) and the one specific to ophthalmology (NEI VFQ-25), will be compared between these groups:

    1. Uveitis diagnosis versus no diagnosis
    2. Free strategy versus standardized strategy.
Same as current
Not Provided
Not Provided
 
Evaluation of a Standardized Strategy for Uveitis Etiological Diagnosis
Uveitis: Medico-economical and Clinical Evaluation of a Standardized Strategy for an Etiological Diagnosis

The Uveitis, the inflammation of the uvea, is a rare disease with an incidence of 52/100,000 inhabitants per year and a prevalence of 115 / 100,000 inhabitants per year.

The causes of uveitis are numerous and include infectious diseases, systemic and neurological diseases, ophthalmic entities, neoplasia, and drug-related reactions. The etiological diagnosis is important both for prognosis and therapeutics.

However, clinical evaluations to establish etiological diagnosis are not standardized. Some authors suggest a minimalist examination, common to all kinds of uveitis. On the other hand, others propose an evaluation guided by the anatomo-clinical type of uveitis.

We conducted a retrospective study to assess the contribution of complementary examinations to etiological determination. In this study, we found that most patients benefited from a wide paraclinical evaluation compared to what is usually described in the literature. Complementary examinations were mostly systematic, without any clinical or ophthalmological elements of orientation. This study highlighted the lack of contribution of some examinations.

Using these results, and the literature analysis, we designed a diagnostic algorithm adapted to the anatomo-clinical type of uveitis.

Moreover, we found that the average cost per patient was estimated at €290.51 with the algorithm compared to €560.83 without it.

We would like to carry out a new study to estimate the efficiency as well as the medico-economic impact of the use of a standardized strategy for the etiological diagnosis of uveitis, compared with a free strategy.

Hypothesis:

  • The standardized strategy for the diagnostic of uveitis is at least as efficient as the free one, and costs half as much.
  • The examinations prescribed, except for those from the standardized strategy, do not contribute to etiological determination.
Not Provided
Interventional
Not Provided
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Open Label
Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
Uveitis
  • Other: Free strategy
    Free strategy followed in order to make the etiological diagnosis, which means, investigators are free to perform any examination they thought necessary.
    Other Name: Procedure or strategy leading to the etiological diagnosis of the uveitis.
  • Other: Standardized strategy
    Etiological diagnosis made by following a standardized two-stage strategy: first-line assessment (listed examinations and then examinations directed by the clinical or para-clinical elements of orientation) and second or third-line assessment (examinations directed by the anatomo-clinical type of uveitis).
  • Active Comparator: Free strategy
    Free strategy followed in order to make the etiological diagnosis, which means, investigators are free to perform any examination they thought necessary.
    Intervention: Other: Free strategy
  • Experimental: Experimental strategy
    Etiological diagnosis made by following a standardized two-stage strategy: first-line assessment (listed examinations and then examinations directed by the clinical or para-clinical elements of orientation) and second or third-line assessment (examinations directed by the anatomo-clinical type of uveitis).
    Intervention: Other: Standardized strategy
Not Provided

*   Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline.
 
Active, not recruiting
894
July 2014
July 2014   (final data collection date for primary outcome measure)

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Uveitis
  • Patient consulting one of the study's sites
  • Age > 18 years old
  • Affiliation to the French national health insurance program
  • Patient agreeing to participate in the study

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Positive HIV serology
  • Postsurgical or posttraumatic uveitis or endophthalmitis
  • Toxoplasmic uveitis
  • Pathology likely to be the cause of the known uveitis
  • Ophthalmic entities only diagnosed by the ophthalmic examination
  • Age < 18 years old
  • Patient under law protection or guardianship
  • Pregnant women or those planning to be pregnant during the study
  • Severe uveitis (VA < 20/200) with retinal vascularitis requiring an emergency treatment and assessment.
Both
18 Years and older
No
Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects
France
 
NCT01162070
2009.566/19
Yes
Hospices Civils de Lyon
Hospices Civils de Lyon
Not Provided
Not Provided
Hospices Civils de Lyon
October 2013

ICMJE     Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP