scholarly journals Patient-reported outcome measures for hip-related pain: a review of the available evidence and a consensus statement from the International Hip-related Pain Research Network, Zurich 2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (14) ◽  
pp. 848-857 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franco M Impellizzeri ◽  
Denise M Jones ◽  
Damian Griffin ◽  
Marcie Harris-Hayes ◽  
Kristian Thorborg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Middle Aged ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Active Adults

Hip-related pain is a well-recognised complaint among active young and middle-aged active adults. People experiencing hip-related disorders commonly report pain and reduced functional capacity, including difficulties in executing activities of daily living. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential to accurately examine and compare the effects of different treatments on disability in those with hip pain. In November 2018, 38 researchers and clinicians working in the field of hip-related pain met in Zurich, Switzerland for the first International Hip-related Pain Research Network meeting. Prior to the meeting, evidence summaries were developed relating to four prioritised themes. This paper discusses the available evidence and consensus process from which recommendations were made regarding the appropriate use of PROMs to assess disability in young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain. Our process to gain consensus had five steps: (1) systematic review of systematic reviews; (2) preliminary discussion within the working group; (3) update of the more recent high-quality systematic review and examination of the psychometric properties of PROMs according to established guidelines; (4) formulation of the recommendations considering the limitations of the PROMs derived from the examination of their quality; and (5) voting and consensus. Out of 102 articles retrieved, 6 systematic reviews were selected and assessed for quality according to AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews). Two showed moderate quality. We then updated the most recent review. The updated literature search resulted in 10 additional studies that were included in the qualitative synthesis. The recommendations based on evidence summary and PROMs limitations were presented at the consensus meeting. The group makes the following recommendations: (1) the Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) and the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT) instruments (long and reduced versions) are the most appropriate PROMs to use in young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain; (2) more research is needed into the utility of the HAGOS and the iHOT instruments in a non-surgical treatment context; and (3) generic quality of life measures such as the EuroQoL-5 Dimension Questionnaire and the Short Form Health Survey-36 may add value for researchers and clinicians in this field. We conclude that as none of the instruments shows acceptable quality across various psychometric properties, more methods studies are needed to further evaluate the validity of these PROMS—the HAGOS and iHOT—as well as the other (currently not recommended) PROMS.

scholarly journals Physiotherapist-led treatment for young to middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain: consensus recommendations from the International Hip-related Pain Research Network, Zurich 2018

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (9) ◽  
pp. 504-511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne L Kemp ◽  
May Arna Risberg ◽  
Andrea Mosler ◽  
Marcie Harris-Hayes ◽  
Andreas Serner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Middle Aged ◽  
Consensus Recommendations ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Active Adults

The 1st International Hip-related Pain Research Network meeting discussed four prioritised themes concerning hip-related pain in young to middle-aged adults: (1) diagnosis and classification of hip-related pain; (2) patient-reported outcome measures for hip-related pain; (3) measurement of physical capacity for hip-related pain; (4) physiotherapist-led treatment for hip-related pain. Thirty-eight expert researchers and clinicians working in the field of hip-related pain attended the meeting. This manuscript relates to the theme of physiotherapist-led treatments for hip-related pain. A systematic review on the efficacy of physiotherapist-led interventions for hip-related pain (published separately) was conducted and found that strong evidence for physiotherapist-led treatments was lacking. Prior to the meeting, draft consensus recommendations for consideration in the meeting were also developed based on the systematic review. The draft consensus recommendations were presented to all of the meeting participants via email, at least 1 week prior to the meeting. At the meeting, these recommendations were discussed, revised and voted on. Six recommendations for clinical practice and five recommendations for research were included and all gained consensus. Recommendations for clinical practice were that (i) Exercise-based treatments are recommended for people with hip-related pain. (ii) Exercise-based treatment should be at least 3 months duration. (iii) Physiotherapist-led rehabilitation after hip surgery should be undertaken. (iv) Patient-reported outcome measures, measures of physical impairment and measures of psychosocial factors should be used to monitor response to treatment. (v) Physical activity (that may include sport) is recommended for people with hip-related pain. (vi) Clinicians should discuss patient expectations, use shared-decision making and provide education. Recommendations for research were (i) Reporting of exercise programmes: Exercise descriptors such as load magnitude, number of repetitions and sets, duration of whole programme, duration of contractile element of exercise, duration of one repetition, time under tension, rest between repetitions, range of motion through which the exercise is performed, and rest between exercise sessions should be reported. (ii) Research should investigate the optimal frequency, intensity, time, type, volume and progression of exercise therapy. (iii) Research should examine the effect of patient education in people with hip-related pain. (iv) Research should investigate the effect of other treatments used in people with hip-related pain (for example: manual therapy, medications, injections). (v) Research should examine the impact of comorbidities and social determinants on treatment effectiveness in people with hip-related pain. Clinicians and researchers working with young to middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain may use these consensus recommendations to guide, develop, test and implement individualised, evidence-based physiotherapist-led rehabilitation programmes.

scholarly journals Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Cystic Fibrosis: Protocol for a Systematic Review (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irushi Ratnayake ◽  
Susannah Ahern ◽  
Rasa Ruseckaite
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cystic Fibrosis ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Patient Reported

BACKGROUND Patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) can struggle with burdensome symptoms and treatment regimens that negatively affect every aspect of their life. As physiological parameters can fail to capture these complications, the assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) has gained prominence. HRQOL can be measured using standardized patient questionnaires called patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The Australian Cystic Fibrosis Data Registry (ACFDR) collects clinical data on adult and pediatric patients with CF. The incorporation of PROMs into the ACFDR would enable monitoring of HRQOL trends, benchmarking of HRQOL outcomes, and support of HRQOL research in CF. OBJECTIVE Prior to incorporation of a PROM in the ACFDR, this systematic review was planned to evaluate whether any suitable PROMs are currently being used for CF. METHODS This systematic review will be conducted in compliance with the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols) guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published between January 2009 and February 2019 on the use of PROMs to measure HRQOL in adult and pediatric patients with CF. Study designs such as observational studies, reviews and validation studies were included. Studies describing randomized controlled trials, dissertations, books, guideline statements, and abstracts were excluded. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. A descriptive synthesis of the results will be undertaken in line with the outcomes of this study. RESULTS As of July 2019, the search has been conducted and 4530 records were screened. After two phases of screening, 97 studies were included in the final review and subjected to data extraction. Reviewers are currently in the process of critical appraisal. CONCLUSIONS This review will identify any PROM(s) that may be used to measure HRQOL in the ACFDR. CLINICALTRIAL PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42019126931; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=126931

scholarly journals Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Diabetes: Systematic Review

10.2196/25002 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (8) ◽  
pp. e25002
Author(s):  
Priscilla Jia Ling Wee ◽  
Yu Heng Kwan ◽  
Dionne Hui Fang Loh ◽  
Jie Kie Phang ◽  
Troy H Puar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported

Background The management of diabetes is complex. There is growing recognition of the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as a standardized method of obtaining an outlook on patients’ functional status and well-being. However, no systematic reviews have summarized the studies that investigate the measurement properties of diabetes PROMs. Objective Our aims were to conduct a systematic review of studies investigating the measurement properties of diabetes PROMs by evaluating the methodological quality and overall level of evidence of these PROMs and to categorize them based on the outcome measures assessed. Methods This study was guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Relevant articles were retrieved from the Embase, PubMed, and PsychINFO databases. The PROMs were evaluated with the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) guidelines. Results A total of 363 articles evaluating the measurement properties of PROMs for diabetes in the adult population were identified, of which 238 unique PROMs from 248 studies reported in 209 articles were validated in the type 2 diabetes population. PROMs with at least a moderate level of evidence for ≥5 of 9 measurement properties include the Chinese version of the Personal Diabetes Questionnaire (C-PDQ), Diabetes Self-Management Instrument Short Form (DSMI-20), and Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scale in Hong Kong primary care patients (C-ITAS-HK), of which the C-PDQ has a “sufficient (+)” rating for >4 measurement properties. A total of 43 PROMs meet the COSMIN guidelines for recommendation for use. Conclusions This study identified and synthesized evidence for the measurement properties of 238 unique PROMs for patients with type 2 diabetes and categorized the PROMs according to their outcome measures. These findings may assist clinicians and researchers in selecting appropriate high-quality PROMs for clinical practice and research. Trial Registration PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020180978; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020180978.

scholarly journals Patient-reported outcome measures for masticatory function in adults: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanpin Fan ◽  
Xin Shu ◽  
Katherine Chiu Man Leung ◽  
Edward Chin Man Lo
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Food Intake ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Masticatory Function ◽  
Food Items ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Objective The aim of this systematic review was to critically evaluate the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for masticatory function in adults. Methods Five electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL Plus and APA PsycINFO) were searched up to March 2021. Studies reporting development or validation of PROMs for masticatory function on adults were identified. Methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias checklist. Psychometric properties of the PROM in each included study were rated against the criteria for good measurement properties based on the COSMIN guideline. Results Twenty-three studies investigating 19 PROMs were included. Methodological qualities of these studies were diverse. Four types of PROMs were identified: questions using food items to assess masticatory function (13 PROMs), questions on chewing problems (3 PROMs), questions using both food items and chewing problems (2 PROMs) and a global question (1 PROM). Only a few of these PROMs, namely chewing function questionnaire-Chinese, Croatian or Albanian, food intake questionnaire-Japanese, new food intake questionnaire-Japanese, screening for masticatory disorders in older adults and perceived difficulty of chewing-Tanzania demonstrated high or moderate level of evidence in several psychometric properties. Conclusions Currently, there is no PROM for masticatory function in adults with high-level evidence for all psychometric properties. There are variations in the psychometric properties among the different reported PROMs. Trial Registration PROSPERO (CRD42020171591).

scholarly journals Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Patients with Diabetes Mellitus Associated with Foot and Ankle Pathologies: A Systematic Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Ortega-Avila ◽  
Pablo Cervera-Garvi ◽  
Laura Ramos-Petersen ◽  
Esther Chicharro-Luna ◽  
Gabriel Gijon-Nogueron
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Type I ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Foot Health ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic and complex disease, which is a major cause of morbidity and mortality and affects all age groups. It commonly produces secondary effects on the foot, often making daily activities impossible. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide a standardised method of obtaining patients’ outlooks on their functional status and wellbeing. Although many instruments have been proposed for obtaining data on persons with DM whose feet are affected by the disease, in many cases the psychometric properties of the instrument have yet to be established. The principal objective of our review was to identify PROMs specific for patients with DM affecting the foot and ankle and to evaluate the psychometric properties and methodological quality of these instruments. Methods: In this systematic review, we investigate studies (published in English or Spanish) based on the use of one or more PROMs specific to foot and ankle pathologies for patients with DM (type I or II). To do so, the databases PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, PEDro and Google Scholar were searched for studies that analysed psychometric or clinimetric properties in this respect. These were assessed according to Terwee or COSMIN criteria. Results: Of the 1016 studies identified in the initial search, only 11 were finally included in the qualitative review. Analysis according to Terwee and COSMIN criteria showed that the Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ) presented the greatest number of positive values. Conclusions: The FHSQ is the highest-quality PROM currently available for the foot and ankle, for patients with DM.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document