A survey of Canadian neurologists’ perspectives and preferences for laboratory reporting of CSF oligoclonal banding

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Clinical biochemistry Pub Date : 2024-11-21 DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2024.110855
Victoria Higgins , Michelle L. Parker , Daniel R. Beriault , Ahmed Mostafa , Mathew P. Estey , Terence Agbor , Ola Z. Ismail
{"title":"A survey of Canadian neurologists’ perspectives and preferences for laboratory reporting of CSF oligoclonal banding","authors":"Victoria Higgins ,&nbsp;Michelle L. Parker ,&nbsp;Daniel R. Beriault ,&nbsp;Ahmed Mostafa ,&nbsp;Mathew P. Estey ,&nbsp;Terence Agbor ,&nbsp;Ola Z. Ismail","doi":"10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2024.110855","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) oligoclonal banding (OCB) analysis aids in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS). Despite its clinical importance, there is profound variation in processes, reporting, and interpretation of CSF OCB and associated tests/indices across Canadian laboratories. This is likely due to the lack of clear, evidence-based recommendations on CSF OCB analysis processes and reporting. Here, we assessed the CSF OCB reporting needs and preferences of Canadian neurologists as a first step in clinical stakeholder engagement to aid in the development of CSF OCB reporting recommendations.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A 16-question survey was sent to neurologists across Canada in January 2022, and it closed in March 2022. The survey included questions regarding location and length of clinical practice; preferred maximum time limit for paired CSF and serum samples; reporting preferences for CSF-specific OCB, banding patterns, and associated tests/indices; as well as the clinical utility of CSF OCB and associated tests/indices.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twenty-two neurologists from nine provinces participated, with a median practice length of 13 years. Most (64 %) preferred a 24-hour limit for paired serum and CSF sample collection. The majority (73 %) favored a cutoff of ≥ 2 CSF-specific bands for positivity, aligning with the 2017 McDonald criteria. Opinions varied on reporting the number of bands and listing specific conditions in the interpretive comments. Some highlighted the need for further research on band count interpretation and its clinical implications. All respondents found CSF OCB results useful, with 64 % valuing it more than other CSF tests for MS evaluation.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our survey reveals diverse preferences among Canadian neurologists for CSF OCB reporting. Stakeholder engagement and further research are crucial for standardized, improved MS diagnostic practices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10172,"journal":{"name":"Clinical biochemistry","volume":"135 ","pages":"Article 110855"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical biochemistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0009912024001498","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) oligoclonal banding (OCB) analysis aids in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS). Despite its clinical importance, there is profound variation in processes, reporting, and interpretation of CSF OCB and associated tests/indices across Canadian laboratories. This is likely due to the lack of clear, evidence-based recommendations on CSF OCB analysis processes and reporting. Here, we assessed the CSF OCB reporting needs and preferences of Canadian neurologists as a first step in clinical stakeholder engagement to aid in the development of CSF OCB reporting recommendations.

Methods

A 16-question survey was sent to neurologists across Canada in January 2022, and it closed in March 2022. The survey included questions regarding location and length of clinical practice; preferred maximum time limit for paired CSF and serum samples; reporting preferences for CSF-specific OCB, banding patterns, and associated tests/indices; as well as the clinical utility of CSF OCB and associated tests/indices.

Results

Twenty-two neurologists from nine provinces participated, with a median practice length of 13 years. Most (64 %) preferred a 24-hour limit for paired serum and CSF sample collection. The majority (73 %) favored a cutoff of ≥ 2 CSF-specific bands for positivity, aligning with the 2017 McDonald criteria. Opinions varied on reporting the number of bands and listing specific conditions in the interpretive comments. Some highlighted the need for further research on band count interpretation and its clinical implications. All respondents found CSF OCB results useful, with 64 % valuing it more than other CSF tests for MS evaluation.

Conclusions

Our survey reveals diverse preferences among Canadian neurologists for CSF OCB reporting. Stakeholder engagement and further research are crucial for standardized, improved MS diagnostic practices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
加拿大神经科医生对实验室报告 CSF 少克隆条带的观点和偏好调查。
简介:脑脊液(CSF)寡克隆带(OCB)分析有助于诊断多发性硬化症(MS)。尽管其临床重要性不言而喻,但加拿大各实验室在脑脊液寡克隆带分析及相关检测/指标的流程、报告和解释方面却存在很大差异。这可能是由于缺乏关于 CSF OCB 分析流程和报告的明确循证建议。在此,我们对加拿大神经科医生的 CSF OCB 报告需求和偏好进行了评估,作为临床利益相关者参与的第一步,以帮助制定 CSF OCB 报告建议:方法: 2022 年 1 月,我们向加拿大各地的神经科医生发送了一份包含 16 个问题的调查问卷,并于 2022 年 3 月结束。调查内容包括临床实践的地点和时间长短;CSF 和血清样本配对的首选最长时限;CSF 特异性 OCB、分带模式和相关检验/指标的报告偏好;以及 CSF OCB 和相关检验/指标的临床实用性:来自 9 个省的 22 名神经科医生参加了此次调查,他们的执业年限中位数为 13 年。大多数医生(64%)倾向于将血清和脑脊液样本的采集时间限制为 24 小时。大多数人(73%)赞成 CSF 特异性条带阳性的临界值≥ 2,这与 2017 年麦克唐纳标准一致。对于在解释性意见中报告条带数和列出具体条件,意见不一。一些人强调需要进一步研究条带数解释及其临床意义。所有受访者都认为 CSF OCB 结果有用,64% 的受访者认为 CSF OCB 比其他 MS 评估 CSF 检测更有价值:我们的调查揭示了加拿大神经科医生对 CSF OCB 报告的不同偏好。利益相关者的参与和进一步的研究对于标准化和改进 MS 诊断实践至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical biochemistry
Clinical biochemistry 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
151
审稿时长
25 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Biochemistry publishes articles relating to clinical chemistry, molecular biology and genetics, therapeutic drug monitoring and toxicology, laboratory immunology and laboratory medicine in general, with the focus on analytical and clinical investigation of laboratory tests in humans used for diagnosis, prognosis, treatment and therapy, and monitoring of disease.
期刊最新文献
Longitudinal changes in plasma Cystatin C and all-cause mortality risk among the middle-aged and elderly Chinese population Biochemical exploration of cholestasis: interpretation, traps and interferences A survey of Canadian neurologists’ perspectives and preferences for laboratory reporting of CSF oligoclonal banding Discordance between creatinine and cystatin C-based estimation of glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in solid organ transplant patients. Evaluation of the applicability of urine lateral flow immunochromatography tests for the detection of cocaine in plasma samples
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1