An evaluation of patient-reported outcome measures in lower limb reconstruction surgery

Background Existing lower-limb, region-specific, patient-reported outcome measures have clinimetric limitations, including limitations in psychometric characteristics (eg, lack of internal consistency, lack of responsiveness, measurement error) and the lack of reported practical and general characteristics. A new patient-reported outcome measure, the Lower Limb Functional Index (LLFI), was developed to address these limitations. Objective The purpose of this study was to overcome recognized deficiencies in existing lower-limb, region-specific, patient-reported outcome measures through: (1) development of a new lower-extremity outcome scale (ie, the LLFI) and (2) evaluation of the clinimetric properties of the LLFI using the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) as a criterion measure. Design This was a prospective observational study. Methods The LLFI was developed in a 3-stage process of: (1) item generation, (2) item reduction with an expert panel, and (3) pilot field testing (n=18) for reliability, responsiveness, and sample size requirements for a larger study. The main study used a convenience sample (n=127) from 10 physical therapy clinics. Participants completed the LLFI and LEFS every 2 weeks for 6 weeks and then every 4 weeks until discharge. Data were used to assess the psychometric, practical, and general characteristics of the LLFI and the LEFS. The characteristics also were evaluated for overall performance using the Measurement of Outcome Measures and Bot clinimetric assessment scales. Results The LLFI and LEFS demonstrated a single-factor structure, comparable reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [2,1]=.97), scale width, and high criterion validity (Pearson r=.88, with 95% confidence interval [CI]). Clinimetric performance was higher for the LLFI compared with the LEFS on the Measurement of Outcome Measures scale (96% and 95%, respectively) and the Bot scale (100% and 83%, respectively). The LLFI, compared with the LEFS, had improved responsiveness (standardized response mean=1.75 and 1.64, respectively), minimal detectable change with 90% CI (6.6% and 8.1%, respectively), and internal consistency (α=.91 and .95, respectively), as well as readability with reduced user error and completion and scoring times. Limitations Limitations of the study were that only participants recruited from outpatient physical therapy clinics were included and that no specific conditions or diagnostic subgroups were investigated. Conclusion The LLFI demonstrated sound clinimetric properties. There was lower response error, efficient completion and scoring, and improved responsiveness and overall performance compared with the LEFS. The LLFI is suitable for assessment of lower-limb function.

Download Full-text

Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Major Lower Limb Amputation Caused by Peripheral Artery Disease or Diabetes: A Systematic Review

European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery ◽

10.1016/j.ejvs.2020.11.043 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Rachael Miller ◽

Graeme K. Ambler ◽

Jozel Ramirez ◽

Jonathan Rees ◽

Robert Hinchliffe ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Peripheral Artery Disease ◽

Lower Limb ◽

Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Limb Amputation ◽

Peripheral Artery ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Artery Disease

Download Full-text

JAPANESE TRANSLATION OF THE PROSTHETIC LIMB USERS SURVEY OF MOBILITY

Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal ◽

10.33137/cpoj.v1i2.32017 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Geoffrey Balkman ◽

Soshi Samejima ◽

David Aoki ◽

Brian J. Hafner

Keyword(s):

Poster Presentation ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Lower Limb ◽

Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Scientific Committee ◽

National Assembly ◽

Prosthetic Limb ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Japanese Translation

INTRODUCTION Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used by prosthetists to assess and communicate effectiveness of prosthetic interventions. The Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M) is a PROM developed to evaluate lower limb prosthetic mobility.1 Valid and reliable translations of prosthetics-specific PROMs, like PLUS-M, do not exist for Japanese-speaking patients. The purpose of this research was to translate PLUS-M to Japanese using rigorous translation guidelines in order to maintain the meaning and applicability of items across both languages. Abstract PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/32017/24436 How to cite: Balkman G, Samejima S, Aoki D, Hafner B.J. JAPANESE TRANSLATION OF THE PROSTHETIC LIMB USERS SURVEY OF MOBILITY. CANADIAN PROSTHETICS & ORTHOTICS JOURNAL, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 2, 2018; ABSTRACT, POSTER PRESENTATION AT THE AOPA’S 101ST NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, SEPT. 26-29, VANCOUVER, CANADA, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v1i2.32017 Abstracts were Peer-reviewed by the American Orthotic Prosthetic Association (AOPA) 101st National Assembly Scientific Committee. http://www.aopanet.org/

Download Full-text

Patient reported outcome measures following specialist nurse-led clinics in preparation for breast reconstruction surgery

The Breast ◽

10.1016/j.breast.2010.04.009 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 19 (5) ◽

pp. 428-431 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Caroline L.E. Osborne ◽

Fiona G. Court ◽

Joseph M. O’Donoghue ◽

Sue E. Keeton ◽

Sara Heary ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Reconstruction ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Specialist Nurse ◽

Reconstruction Surgery ◽

Patient Reported

Download Full-text

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures With Secondary Lower Limb Lymphedemas: A Systematic Review

Journal of the Advanced Practitioner in Oncology ◽

10.6004/jadpro.2021.12.2.5 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Margit Eidenberger, PT Mag

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Lower Limb ◽

Intraclass Correlation ◽

Disease Free Survival ◽

Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Poor Quality ◽

Patient Reported

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures are measures of patients’ health-related quality of life. They should be added to other lymphedema measurements. With an improved disease-free survival of secondary lower limb lymphedema, attention must focus on such assessments. Objective: The objectives of this study were to locate and critically appraise suitable patient-reported outcomes measures for lower limb lymphedemas and search for existing valid translations for native German speakers. Methods: A systematic literature research was conducted. 20 semantical categories for qualitative analysis were evolved. Six questionnaires available in English and some in validated translations remained for analysis. Results: Lower limb lymphedema patients experience poor quality of life, and one of the most critical denominators is skin quality. To establish skin care and prevent cellulitis, patients must learn about skin problems. Only two tools asked for past infections. This is considered crucial because of knowledge building and prophylactic behavior. Questions on movement restrictions were available in one questionnaire. As these have a close connection to one’s ability to perform activities of daily life, they can affect quality of life. Afflicted patients have problems with the choice and availability of clothing. Only three questionnaires asked questions about clothing or shoes. Lymphedema patients are exposed to more psychological stress than healthy subjects, but only three questionnaires covered questions about this burden. There was a lack of reporting on psychometric data (Cronbach’s alpha, intraclass correlation), which hinders the external validity. Analyzed questionnaires were available in English but only one in German. Conclusions: The analyzed questionnaires were in English, and only one was adapted and tested for native German speakers. For clinical practice, Devoogdt’s questionnaire is recommended despite some shortcomings. There is a need for validated lymphedema questionnaires in German.

Download Full-text