Dataset Information

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Takayasu Arteritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

We conducted a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) regarding quality of life, disability, mood abnormalities (anxiety, depression), fatigue, illness perceptions and fibromyalgia in Takayasu arteritis (TAK). Wherever available, comparisons with healthy controls, disease controls or longitudinal changes in PROMs were noted.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and Pubmed Central databases, major recent international rheumatology conference abstracts, clinical trial databases and the Cochrane library were searched for relevant articles. Wherever possible, outcome measures across studies were pooled using the restricted maximum likelihood model. Inter-group differences were pooled and compared using standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Quality of randomized controlled trials was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. For cross-sectional and cohort studies, the Joana Briggs Institute checklist and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used, respectively. GRADE methodology was used to determine the certainty of evidence for outcomes.

Results

Twenty-one studies (all but one observational) involving 1311 patients with TAK and 308 healthy controls were identified. Ten studies (559 TAK patients, 182 healthy controls were synthesized in a meta-analysis. Patients with TAK had worse quality of life (pooled SMD - 6.66, 95% CI - 10.08 to - 3.23 for individual domains; - 0.64, 95% CI - 1.19 to - 0.09 for pooled physical and mental component scores of 36-item Short Form Survey), depression (SMD 0.26, 95% 0.05-0.47) and anxiety (SMD 0.34, 95% CI - 0.06 to 0.75) scores and higher disability (SMD 0.64, 95% CI 0.43-0.84) than healthy controls. Patients with active TAK had worse quality of life, depression and work impairment when compared with those with inactive disease. Included studies were of moderate to high quality. Certainty of evidence for individual outcomes was low to very low.

Conclusion

Literature on PROMs in TAK, albeit sparse, appears to indicate worse scores in patients with TAK compared to healthy individuals. These results, however, require cautious interpretation. Development of a TAK-specific PROM is an important focus of the research agenda.

SUBMITTER: Misra DP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8380612 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare requires patient feedback to improve outcomes and experience. This study undertook a systematic review of the depth, variability, and digital suitability of current patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.MethodsA PROSPERO-registered (registration number CRD42021261707) systematic review was undertaken for all relevant English language articles using PubMed version of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases in June 2021. The search used Boolean operators and wildcards and included the keywords: laparoscopic cholecystectomy AND patient outcome OR patient-reported outcome OR patient-reported outcome measure OR PRO OR PROM. Medical Subjects Heading terms were used to search PubMed and Scopus. Articles published from 1 January 2011 to 2 June 2021 were included.ResultsA total of 4960 individual articles were reviewed in this study, of which 44 were found to evaluate PROMs in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and underwent methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) grading. Twenty-one articles spanning 19 countries and four continents met all inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative data synthesis. There was significant heterogeneity in PROMs identified with eight different comprehensive PROM tools used in the 21 studies. There was wide variation in the time points at which PROMs were recorded. Fourteen of 21 studies recorded PROMs before and after surgery, and 7 of 21 recorded PROMs only after surgery. Follow-up intervals ranged from 3 days to 2 years after surgery.ConclusionsThis study identified that while post-laparoscopic cholecystectomy PROMs are infrequently measured currently, tools are widely available to achieve this in clinical practice. PROMs may not capture all the outcomes but should be incorporated into future cholecystectomy outcome research. The EQ-5D™ (EuroQoL Group, Rotterdam, the Netherlands) provides a simple platform for the modern digital era.

Project description:BackgroundPeople with multimorbidity are increasingly engaged, enabled, and empowered to take responsibility for managing their health status. The purpose of the study was to systematically review and appraise the psychometric properties of tools measuring patient engagement in adults with multimorbidity and their applicability for use within engagement programs.MethodsPubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycInfo were searched from inception to 1 July 2021. Gray literature was searched using EBSCO host-database "Open dissertation". The reference lists of studies meeting the inclusion criteria were searched to identify additional eligible studies. The screening of the search results and the data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated with the COSMIN checklist. Relevant data from all included articles were extracted and summarized in evidence synthesis tables.ResultsTwenty articles on eight tools were included. We included tools that measure all four dimensions of patient engagement (i.e., engagement, empowerment, activation, and participation). Their psychometric properties were analyzed separately. Most tools were developed in the last 10 years in Europe or the USA. The comparison of the estimated psychometric properties of the retrieved tools highlighted a significant lack of reliable patient engagement measures for people with multimorbidity. Available measures capture a diversity of constructs and have very limited evidence of psychometric properties that are vital for patient-reported measures, such as invariance, reliability, and responsiveness.ConclusionThis review clarifies how patient engagement, as operationalized in measures purporting to capture this concept, overlaps with, and differs from other related constructs in adults with multimorbidity. The methodological quality of psychometric tools measuring patient engagement in adults with multimorbidity could be improved.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=259968, identifier CRD42021259968.