Radiation dermatitis assessment tools used in breast cancer: A systematic review of measurement properties

Author(s):  
Tara Behroozian ◽  
Lauren T. Milton ◽  
Neil H. Shear ◽  
Erin McKenzie ◽  
Yasmeen Razvi ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 356-362
Author(s):  
Esther Z. Barsom ◽  
Ewout van Hees ◽  
Willem A. Bemelman ◽  
Marlies P. Schijven

BackgroundVideo consultation (VC) is considered promising in delivering healthcare closer to the patient and improving patient satisfaction. Indeed, providing care-at-distance via VC is believed to be promising for some situations and patients, serving their needs without associated concomitant costs. In order to assess implementation and perceived benefits, patient satisfaction is frequently measured. Measuring patient satisfaction with VC in healthcare is often performed using quantitative and qualitative outcome analysis. As studies employ different surveys, pooling of data on the topic is troublesome. This systematic review critically appraises, summarizes, and compares available questionnaires in order to identify the most suitable questionnaire for qualitative outcome research using VC in clinical outpatient care.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for relevant articles using predefined inclusion criteria. Methodological quality appraisal of yielded questionnaires to assess VC was performed using the validated COSMIN guideline.ResultsThis systematic search identified twelve studies that used ten different patient satisfaction questionnaires. The overall quality of nine questionnaires was rated as “inadequate” to “doubtful” according to the COSMIN criteria. None of the questionnaires retrieved completed a robust validation process for the purpose of use.Conclusion and recommendationsAlthough high-quality studies on measurement properties of these questionnaires are scarce, the questionnaire developed by Mekhjian has the highest methodological quality achieving validity on internal consistency and the use of a large sample size. Moreover, this questionnaire can be used across healthcare settings. This finding may be instrumental in further studies measuring patient satisfaction with VC.


BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. e012655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Júlia Caetano Martins ◽  
Larissa Tavares Aguiar ◽  
Sylvie Nadeau ◽  
Aline Alvim Scianni ◽  
Luci Fuscaldi Teixeira-Salmela ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 1179-1195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Indiara Soares Oliveira ◽  
Lucíola da Cunha Menezes Costa ◽  
Felipe Ribeiro Cabral Fagundes ◽  
Cristina Maria Nunes Cabral

Author(s):  
Steven Smet ◽  
Sebastian Probst ◽  
Samantha Holloway ◽  
Anika Fourie ◽  
Hilde Beele ◽  
...  

Author(s):  

Breast cancer (BC) patients are likely to undergo radiotherapy (RT) treatment which may lead to the development of the skin toxicity, radiodermatitis (RD). The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the effectiveness of topical interventions in reducing the severity of RD in females BC patients. Appropriate clinical studies were independently identified through a bibliographic search in PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov. Nine randomised, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) which stated a clear inclusion and exclusion criteria, were included in this review. The studies included in this review were conducted in the last 10 years and researched the effectiveness of only topical therapies on female BC patients. The severity of RD starting at baseline 0 to endpoint was measured using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) scale, and results show most patients experienced a RTOG score change of 0-1 or 0-2. A significant relationship between results obtained from 0-1 and 0-2 was shown (p < 0.00001). Results suggest Radioskin 1&2 cream is the most effective topical treatment for RD as 95% of patients experienced a RTOG score change of 0-1 compared to 5% experiencing 0-2. However, controlled treatments like general care and Aqua Cream seem to be the least effective, as 1.9% of patients administrating general care experienced a RTOG score change of 0-1 compared to 41.9% experiencing 0-2.


2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 476-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Júlia Caetano Martins ◽  
Larissa Tavares Aguiar ◽  
Sylvie Nadeau ◽  
Aline Alvim Scianni ◽  
Luci Fuscaldi Teixeira-Salmela ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol Volume 12 ◽  
pp. 11-26
Author(s):  
Marzieh Jahani Sayad Noveiri ◽  
Farshid Shamsaei ◽  
Masoud Khodaveisi ◽  
Zohreh Vanaki ◽  
Leili Tapak

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 327-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvain Boet ◽  
Nicole Etherington ◽  
Sarah Larrigan ◽  
Li Yin ◽  
Hira Khan ◽  
...  

BackgroundEducational interventions to improve teamwork in crisis situations have proliferated in recent years with substantial variation in teamwork measurement. This systematic review aimed to synthesise available tools and their measurement properties in order to identify the most robust tool for measuring the teamwork performance of teams in crisis situations.MethodsSearches were conducted in Embase (via OVID), PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Education Resources Information Center, Medline and Medline In-Process (via OVID) (through 12 January 2017). Studies evaluating the measurement properties of teamwork assessment tools for teams in clinical or simulated crisis situations were included. Two independent reviewers screened studies based on predetermined criteria and completed data extraction. Risk of bias was assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist.ResultsThe search yielded 1822 references. Twenty studies were included, representing 13 assessment tools. Tools were primarily assessed in simulated resuscitation scenarios for emergency department teams. The Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) had the most validation studies (n=5), which demonstrated three sources of validity (content, construct and concurrent) and three sources of reliability (internal consistency, inter-rater reliability and test–retest reliability). Most studies of TEAM’s measurement properties were at no risk of bias.ConclusionsA number of tools are available for assessing teamwork performance of teams in crisis situations. Although selection will ultimately depend on the user’s context, TEAM may be the most promising tool given its measurement evidence. Currently, there is a lack of tools to assess teamwork performance during intraoperative crisis situations. Additional research is needed in this regard.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document