Perbedaan Nilai The Clinic GBS Severity Evaluation Scale (CGSES) dan Skala Disabilitas Sindroma Guillain-Barre (SDSGB) pada Pasien Sindroma Guillian Barre dengan dan tanpa Imunoterapi

Berliana Sidabutar, Ahmad Rizal Ganiem, Nushrotul Lailiyya, Nani Kurniani, Lisda Amalia, Sobaryati Sobaryati

Abstract


Latar Belakang dan Tujuan: The Clinical GBS Severity Evaluation Scale (CGSES) dikembangkan untuk penentuan imunoterapi pasien Sindroma Guillian Barre (SGB) secara lebih obyektif. Skala Disabilitas SGB (SDSGB) menggambarkan tingkat keparahan SGB dan dapat digunakan menilai efektifitas pemberian imunoterapi. Tujuan penelitian untuk mengetahui perbedaan penilaian CGSES dan SDSGB pasien SGB dengan dan tanpa imunoterapi dan membandingkan kesesuaian keputusan subyektif dengan CGSES.
Subjek dan Metode: Penelitian observasional analitik potong lintang komparatif secara retrospektif pada pasien rawat SGB periode Januari 2015 – Maret 2020 di RSUP Dr Hasan Sadikin Bandung.
Hasil: Terdapat 92 subjek (35 dengan dan 57 tanpa imunoterapi). Rerata usia 41,5 tahun, dengan pria:wanita (57,6%:42,4%). Tidak didapatkan perbedaan demografi dan pemeriksaan fisik kedua kelompok, kecuali paresis saraf kranial (62,9% vs. 33,3%; p=0,006). Terdapat perbedaan rerata lama perawatan dengan dan tanpa imunoterapi (29,5±34,4 vs. 11,4±4,1 hari, p=0,0001). Hasil penilaian CGSES pasien SGB dengan dan tanpa imunoterapi memiliki perbedaan bermakna (p=0,035). Terdapat perbedaan signifikan SDSGB saat masuk dan pulang pasien dengan imunoterapi (p=0,007) dan tanpa imunoterapi (p=0,025). Terdapat ketidaksesuaian keputusan subyektif dengan nilai CGSES (nilai Kappa 0,117; CI95% 0,021-0,213)
Simpulan: Terdapat perbedaan skor CGSES dan SDSGB pada kelompok pasien SGB dengan dan tanpa imunoterapi. Terdapat ketidaksesuaian penilaian subyektif keputusan pemberian imunoterapi dengan skoring CGSES

 

Differences in Value of The Clinic GBS Severity Evaluation Scale (CGSES) and Guillain-Barre Syndrome Disability Scale (GBSDS) in Guillian Barre Syndrome (GBS) Patients with and without Immunotherapy

Abstract

Background and objective: The Clinical GBS Severity Evaluation Scale (CGSES) was developed to determine immunotherapy of GBS patients more objectively. GBS Disability Scale (SDSGB) describes severity of GBS and assesses effectiveness of immunotherapy. Purpose of this study was to measure difference of CGSES and GBSDS in GBS patients with and without immunotherapy and to compare the suitability of subjective decisions with CGSES.
Subject and Methods: This is a comparative cross-sectional analytic observational study retrospectively in GBS patients from January 2015-March 2020 hospitalized at Dr Hasan Sadikin Hospital, Bandung.
Results: There were 92 subjects (35 with and 57 without immunotherapy). Mean age was 41.5 years, and male:female ratio was 57.6%:42.4%. There were no differences in demographics and physical examination between two groups, except for cranial nerve paresis (62.9% vs. 33.3%; p=0.006). There was a difference in mean length of stay with and without immunotherapy (29.5 ± 34.4 vs. 11.4 ± 4.1 days, p=0.0001). Results of the CGSES assessment with and without immunotherapy had a significant difference (p=0.035). There were significant differences in GBSDS at admission and discharge with (p=0.007) and without immunotherapy (p=0.025). There was a discrepancy between subjective decisions and CGSES value (Kappa value 0.117; 95% CI 0.021-0.213).
Conclusion: There were differences in CGSES and GBSDS in group of GBS patients with and without immunotherapy. There was a discrepancy between subjective assessment of decision to give immunotherapy with CGSES scoring.


Keywords


CGSES, imunoterapi, SDSGB, Sindroma Guillain-Barre

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ahmad S, Aida F, Hasnawi H, Suryani G. Pedoman Tatalaksana GBS, CIDP, MG dan Imunoterapi.; 2018.

Van den Berg B, Walgaard C, Drenthen J, Fokke C, Jacobs BC, van Doorn PA. Guillain–Barré syndrome: pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. Nat Rev Neurol. 2014;10(8):469–82.

Shahrizaila N, Yuki N. The role of immunotherapy in Guillain-Barré syndrome: understanding the mechanism of action. Expert Opin Pharmacother.

Reeves HM, Winters JL. The mechanisms of action of plasma exchange. Br J Haematol. 2014;164(3):342–51.

Wang Y, Shang P, Xin M, Bai J, Zhou C, Zhang H-L. The usefulness of chief complaints to predict severity, ventilator dependence, treatment option, and short-term outcome of patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome: a retrospective study. BMC Neurol. 2017;17(1):200.

Chevret S, Hughes RA, Annane D. Plasma exchange for Guillain-Barré syndrome. Cochrane Neuromuscular Group, ed. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Published online February 27, 2017.

van Doorn PA, Ruts L, Jacobs BC. Clinical features, pathogenesis, and treatment of Guillain-Barré syndrome. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7(10):939–50.

Shrivastava M, Nehal S, Seema N. Guillain–Barre syndrome: Demographics, clinical profile & seasonal. INDIAN J MED RES. Published online 2017:6.

Kuwabara S. Guillain-Barré syndrome epidemiology, pathophysiology and management. Published online 2004:14.

Auger N, Quach C, Healy-Profitós J, Dinh T, Chassé M. Early predictors of Guillain-Barré syndrome in the life course of women. Int J Epidemiol. 2018;47(1):280–88.

McGrogan A, Madle GC, Seaman HE, de Vries CS. The Epidemiology of Guillain-Barré Syndrome Worldwide. Neuroepidemiology. 2009;32(2):150–163.

Islam B, Islam Z, Rahman S, Endtz H, Vos M, Van der M, Van Doorn P. Small volume plasma exchange for Guillain-Barré syndrome in resource-limited settings: a phase II safety and feasibility study. BMJ Open. 2018;8(8):e022862.

Bhargava A, Banakar BF, Pujar GS, Khichar S. A study of Guillain–Barré syndrome with reference to cranial neuropathy and its prognostic implication. J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2014;05(S 01):S043-S047.

Bae JS, Yuki N, Kuwabara S, Kim JK, Vucic S, Lin CS, Kierman MC. Guillain-Barre syndrome in Asia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2014;85(8):907–13.

Study Group for Pediatric Guillain-Barre Syndrome. High-dose immunoglobulin therapy for Guillain-Barre syndrome in Japanese children. Pediatr Int. 2003;45(5):543–49.

Liu S, Dong C, Ubogu EE. Immunotherapy of Guillain-Barré syndrome. Hum Vaccines Immunother. Published online June 28, 2018:1–12.

Tsai C-P, Wang K-C, Liu C-Y, Sheng W-Y, Lee T-C. Pharmacoeconomics of therapy for Guillain–Barré syndrome: plasma exchange and intravenous immunoglobulin. J Clin Neurosci. 2007;14(7):625–29.

Alshekhlee A, Hussain Z, Sultan B, Katirji B. Guillain-Barre syndrome: Incidence and mortality rates in US hospitals. Neurology. 2008;70(18):1608–13.

Dhar R, Stitt L, Hahn AF. The morbidity and outcome of patients with Guillain–Barré syndrome admitted to the intensive care unit. J Neurol Sci. 2008;264(1-2):121–28.

Chio A, Cocito D, Leone M, Giordana MT, Mora G, Mutani R. Guillain-Barre syndrome: A prospective, population-based incidence and outcome survey. Neurology. 2003;60(7):1146–50.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24244/jni.v10i2.328

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


                                    

 

JNI is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License