Dataset Information

Assessment of a patient-reported outcome measure in men with prostate cancer who had radical surgery: a Rasch analysis.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the psychometric properties (and identify specific anomalies to be resolved) of urinary and sexual function scales of the Symptom Tracking and Reporting (STAR) instrument for use in clinical practice with individual men using Rasch analysis. DESIGN:Prospective cohort study. SETTING:9 UK surgery centres in secondary care. PARTICIPANTS:403 men diagnosed with prostate cancer and completed at least one questionnaire immediately before and at 1 or 3 months after radical prostatectomy. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES:STAR instrument before surgery and 1 and 3 months afterwards. RESULTS:Neither scale fitted the Rasch model (both scales p<0.001). Both urinary (seven items) and sexual function (six items) had disordered thresholds, suggesting response categories are not working as intended. Both scales (three urinary items; five sexual function items) showed problems with item fit (large fit residuals, significant ?2, an inspection of item characteristic curves). Both scales showed items that were unstable over time (differential item functioning (DIF) by time). Both scales (four pairs of items in each scale) showed local response dependency (residual correlations >0.2 above the average). Internal consistency was acceptable at the group level for both scales. Targeting was poor for both scales, indicating an inadequate match between the location of items and the distribution of the patients, suggesting that the underlying constructs that the scales purport to measure are not clear. CONCLUSION:Using Rasch analysis as a diagnostic tool, we identified that both the urinary and the sexual function scales have issues that need to be resolved before STAR can be used with confidence in clinical practice. The sexual function scale, in particular, is unlikely to provide precise estimates for the outcomes experienced by men after radical prostatectomy. These results demonstrate the need to evaluate the suitability of any patient-reported outcome measure before implementation in routine clinical practice, preferably using modern psychometric methods.

SUBMITTER: Protopapa E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7668365 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessment of a patient-reported outcome measure in men with prostate cancer who had radical surgery: a Rasch analysis.

Protopapa Eva E van der Meulen Jan J Moore Caroline M CM Smith Sarah C SC

BMJ open 20201114 11

<h4>Objectives</h4>To evaluate the psychometric properties (and identify specific anomalies to be resolved) of urinary and sexual function scales of the Symptom Tracking and Reporting (STAR) instrument for use in clinical practice with individual men using Rasch analysis.<h4>Design</h4>Prospective cohort study.<h4>Setting</h4>9 UK surgery centres in secondary care.<h4>Participants</h4>403 men diagnosed with prostate cancer and completed at least one questionnaire immediately before and at 1 or 3 ...[more]

PMID: 33191249

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveAdult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS) is a widespread and debilitating subset of adult spinal deformity. Although many patients benefit from operative treatment, surgery entails substantial cost and risk for adverse events. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are patient-centered tools used to evaluate the appropriateness of surgery and to assist in the shared decision-making process. Framing realistic patient expectations should include the possible functional limitation to improvement inherent in surgical intervention, such as multilevel fusion to the sacrum. The authors' objective was to predict postoperative ASLS PROMs by using clustering analysis, generalized longitudinal regression models, percentile analysis, and clinical improvement analysis of preoperative health-related quality-of-life scores for use in surgical counseling.MethodsOperative results from the combined ASLS cohorts were examined. PROM score clustering after surgery investigated limits of surgical improvement. Patients were categorized by baseline disability (mild, moderate, moderate to severe, or severe) according to preoperative Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22 and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Responder analysis for patients achieving improvement meeting the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) standards was performed using both fixed-threshold and patient-specific values (MCID = 30% of remaining scale, SCB = 50%). Best (top 5%), worst (bottom 5%), and median scores were calculated across disability categories.ResultsA total of 171/187 (91%) of patients with ASLS achieved 2-year follow-up. Patients rarely achieved a PROM ceiling for any measure, with 33%-43% of individuals clustering near 4.0 for SRS domains. Patients with severe baseline disability (< 2.0) SRS-pain and SRS-function scores were often left with moderate to severe disability (2.0-2.9), unlike patients with higher (≥ 3.0) initial PROM values. Patients with mild disability according to baseline SRS-function score were unlikely to improve. Crippling baseline ODI disability (> 60) commonly left patients with moderate disability (median ODI = 32). As baseline ODI disability increased, patients were more likely to achieve MCID and SCB (p < 0.001). Compared to fixed threshold values for MCID and SCB, patient-specific values were more sensitive to change for patients with minimal ODI baseline disability (p = 0.008) and less sensitive to change for patients with moderate to severe SRS subscore disability (p = 0.01).ConclusionsThese findings suggest that ASLS surgeries have a limit to possible improvement, probably due to both baseline disability and the effects of surgery. The most disabled patients often had moderate to severe disability (SRS < 3, ODI > 30) at 2 years, emphasizing the importance of patient counseling and expectation management.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In the past years, a mobile health (mHealth) app called the Dutch Talking Touch Screen Questionnaire (DTTSQ) was developed in The Netherlands. The aim of development was to enable Dutch physical therapy patients to autonomously complete a health-related questionnaire regardless of their level of literacy and digital skills. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to evaluate the usability (defined as the effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction) of the prototype of the DTTSQ for Dutch physical therapy patients with diverse levels of experience in using mobile technology. METHODS:The qualitative Three-Step Test-Interview method, including both think-aloud and retrospective probing techniques, was used to gain insight into the usability of the DTTSQ. A total of 24 physical therapy patients were included. The interview data were analyzed using a thematic content analysis approach aimed at analyzing the accuracy and completeness with which participants completed the questionnaire (effectiveness), the time it took the participants to complete the questionnaire (efficiency), and the extent to which the participants were satisfied with the ease of use of the questionnaire (satisfaction). The problems encountered by the participants in this study were given a severity rating that was used to provide a rough estimate of the need for additional usability efforts. RESULTS:All participants within this study were very satisfied with the ease of use of the DTTSQ. Overall, 9 participants stated that the usability of the app exceeded their expectations. The group of 4 average-/high-experienced participants encountered only 1 problem in total, whereas the 11 little-experienced participants encountered an average of 2 problems per person and the 9 inexperienced participants an average of 3 problems per person. A total of 13 different kind of problems were found during this study. Of these problems, 4 need to be addressed before the DTTSQ will be released because they have the potential to negatively influence future usage of the tool. The other 9 problems were less likely to influence future usage of the tool substantially. CONCLUSIONS:The usability of the DTTSQ needs to be improved before it can be released. No problems were found with satisfaction or efficiency during the usability test. The effectiveness needs to be improved by (1) making it easier to navigate through screens without the possibility of accidentally skipping one, (2) enabling the possibility to insert an answer by tapping on the text underneath a photograph instead of just touching the photograph itself, and (3) making it easier to correct wrong answers. This study shows the importance of including less skilled participants in a usability study when striving for inclusive design and the importance of measuring not just satisfaction but also efficiency and effectiveness during such studies.

Project description:PurposeTo report the variability in outcome measures after meniscal surgery and to compare responsiveness between patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).MethodsA systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science databases was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. A total of 257 studies met inclusion criteria. Patient and study attributes were extracted, including pre- and postoperative means for PROMs. Of the studies that met inclusion criteria for responsiveness analysis (2+ PROMs reported, 1-year minimum follow-up; n = 172), we compared the responsiveness between PROM instruments using effect size and relative efficiency (RE) if a PROM could be compared with another in at least 10 articles.ResultsIn total, 18,612 patients (18,690 menisci, mean age = 38.6 years, mean body mass index = 26.3) were included in this study. Radiographic measures were reported in 167 (65.0%) studies, range of motion was reported in 53 (20.6%) studies, and 35 different PROM instruments were identified. The mean number of PROMs in each article was 3.6 and 83.8% reported 2 or more PROMs. The most used PROMs were Lysholm (74.5%) and IKDC (51.0%). IKDC was found to be more responsive than other PROMs, which include Lysholm (RE = 1.03), Tegner (RE = 3.90), and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Activities of Daily Living (ADL) (RE = 1.12). KOOS Quality of Life (QoL) was also more responsive than other PROMs, such as IKDC (RE = 1.45) and KOOS ADL (RE = 1.48). Lysholm was more responsive compared with KOOS QoL (RE = 1.14), KOOS ADL (RE = 1.96), and Tegner (RE = 3.53).ConclusionsOur study found that IKDC, KOOS QoL, and Lysholm were the most responsive PROMs. However, because of the previously reported risks of either floor effects (KOOS QoL) or ceiling effects (Lysholm), the IKDC may offer a more complete psychometric profile when quantifying outcomes after meniscus procedures.Clinical relevanceTo improve clinical outcomes, surgical decision-making, and research methodology, it is important to determine which PROMs are the most responsive after meniscal surgery.

Dataset Information

Assessment of a patient-reported outcome measure in men with prostate cancer who had radical surgery: a Rasch analysis.

Publications

Assessment of a patient-reported outcome measure in men with prostate cancer who had radical surgery: a Rasch analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets