Health-related quality of life in primary hepatic cancer: a systematic review assessing the methodological properties of instruments and a meta-analysis comparing treatment strategies.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
Patient-reported outcomes including health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are important oncological outcome measures. The validation of HRQoL instruments for patients with hepatocellular and cholangiocellular carcinoma is lacking. Furthermore, studies comparing different treatment options in respect to HRQoL are sparse. The objective of the systematic review and meta-analysis was, therefore, to identify all available HRQoL tools regarding primary liver cancer, to assess the methodological quality of these HRQoL instruments and to compare surgical, interventional and medical treatments with regard to HRQoL.Methods
A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EMBASE. The methodological quality of all identified HRQoL instruments was performed according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurements INstruments (COSMIN) standard. Consequently, the quality of reporting of HRQoL data was assessed. Finally, wherever possible HRQoL data were extracted and quantitative analyses were performed.Results
A total of 124 studies using 29 different HRQoL instruments were identified. After the methodological assessment, only 10 instruments fulfilled the psychometric criteria and could be included in subsequent analyses. However, quality of reporting of HRQoL data was insufficient, precluding meta-analyses for 9 instruments.Conclusion
Using a standardized methodological assessment, specific HRQoL instruments are recommended for use in patients with hepatocellular and cholangiocellular carcinoma. HRQoL data of patients undergoing treatment of primary liver cancers are sparse and reporting falls short of published standards. Meaningful comparison of established treatment options with regard to HRQoL was impossible indicating the need for future research.
SUBMITTER: Wohlleber K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8405513 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionThe World Organization recommends to implement National Quality Policies and Strategies in health systems, but few instruments have been proposed to assess and monitor these quality interventions at the system level. This study will map and compare instruments for the assessment of quality policies and strategies in health systems around the world.Methods and analysisThis is a scoping review protocol developed according to the Joanna Briggs Institute's manual and guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. The search for articles will be performed in the following Embase, Medline/Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Searches will also be conducted on Google Scholar and grey literature (www.opengrey.eu). A descriptive analysis of studies mapped by analysis categories will be performed. The results will be presented through a narrative summary of the mapped findings to verify how the results correlate with the objective and research question of the review.Ethics and disseminationThe study does not require an ethical review due to its nature. The submission of results for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at a scientific conference is expected. LINK TO THE PROTOCOL RECORD IN THE OPEN SCIENCE FRAMEWORK OSF: https://DOI.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/2KMTS.
| S-EPMC10030568 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionUsing specific tools to assess the measurement properties of health status instruments is recommended both to standardise the review process and to improve the methodological quality of systematic reviews. However, depending on the measurement standards on which these tools are developed, the approach to appraise the measurement properties of instruments may vary. For this reason, the present meta-review aims to: (1) identify systematic reviews assessing the measurement properties of instruments evaluating health-related quality of life (HRQoL); (2) identify the tools applied to assess the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments; (3) describe the characteristics of the tools applied to assess the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments; (4) identify the measurement standards on which these tools were developed or conform to and (5) compare the similarities and differences among the identified measurement standards.Methods and analysisA systematic review will be conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols Guidelines. Electronic search will be carried out on bibliographic databases, including PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Psychological Information, SCOPUS, Web of Science, COSMIN database and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, being limited by time (2008-2018) and language (English). Descriptive analyses of different aspects of tools applied to evaluate the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments will be presented; the different measurement standards will be described and some recommendations about the methodological and research applications will be made.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not necessary for systematic review protocols. The results will be disseminated by its publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a relevant conference.Prospero registration numberCRD42017065232.
| S-EPMC6059301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:RATIONALE:Having developed the first disease-specific, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments for children with primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD), we aimed to assess the psychometric performance of quality of life (QOL)-PCD child, adolescent, and parent-proxy versions in terms of reliability and validity across cross-cultural settings and caring for patients with this rare disease. METHODS:Children (n?=?71), adolescents (n?=?85), and parents (n?=?68) from multiple centers in the UK and North America completed age-appropriate QOL-PCD and generic QOL measures: pediatric QOL inventory, COPD assessment test (CAT), and Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 20. Total of 13 children, 13 parents, and 17 adolescents repeated QOL-PCD 10 to 14 days later to assess test-retest reliability. Multitrait analysis evaluated how the items loaded to hypothesized scales: physical, emotional & social functioning, treatment burden, role, vitality, upper and lower respiratory symptoms, and ears and hearing symptoms. Examination of item-to-total correlations led to removal of three, five, and six items, respectively in the prototype child, adolescent and parent-proxy versions; the validated measures now comprise between 34 and 38 items. RESULTS:The QOL-PCD scales had good internal consistency; Cronbach's ? for QOL-PCD parent-proxy ranged 0.62 to 0.86. Test-retest reliability demonstrated stability across all scales; for example QOL-PCD adolescent intraclass correlation coefficients ranged 0.71 to 0.89. Significant relationships were found between QOL-PCD scales and similar constructs on generic questionnaires, for example, QOL-PCD adolescent lower respiratory symptoms and the CAT score (r?=?.64, P?<?.01); weaker correlations were found between different constructs. CONCLUSION:Age-specific QOL-PCD demonstrated good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and validity. QOL-PCD offers promising outcome measures for multicenter clinical trials, as well as monitoring symptoms, functioning, and QOL during routine care.
| S-EPMC6851410 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe objective was to obtain a standardized evaluation of available prostate cancer-specific quality of life instruments used in patients with early-stage disease.MethodsWe carried out systematic literature reviews in the PubMed database to identify manuscripts which contained information regarding either the development process or metric properties of prostate cancer-specific quality of life instruments. Each instrument was evaluated by two experts, independently, using the Evaluating Measures of Patient-Reported Outcomes (EMPRO) tool. An overall and seven attribute-specific EMPRO scores were calculated (range 0-100, worst to best): measurement model, reliability, validity, responsiveness, interpretability, burden and alternative forms.ResultsEight instruments and 57 manuscripts (2-15 per instrument) were identified. The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) was the best rated (overall EMPRO score 83.1 points). Good results were also obtained by University of California Los Angeles-Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale (PORPUS) and Prostate Cancer Quality of Life Instrument (PC-QoL) with 77.3, 70.5 and 64.8 points, respectively. These four instruments passed with distinction the validity and responsiveness evaluation. Insufficient reliability results were observed for UCLA-PCI and PORPUS.ConclusionsCurrent evidence supports the choice of EPIC, PORPUS or PC-QoL. Attribute-specific EMPRO results facilitate selecting the adequate instrument for every purpose. For longitudinal studies or clinical trials, where responsiveness is the priority, EPIC or PC-QoL should be considered. We recommend the PORPUS for economic evaluations because it allows cost-utility analysis, and EPIC short versions to minimize administration burden.
| S-EPMC4155169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: A key component to monitoring and investigating patient QOL is through patient reported health related quality of life (HRQOL) outcome measures. Many instruments have been used to assess HRQOL in bladder cancer and each instrument varies in its development, validation, the context of its usage in the literature and its applicability to certain disease states. Objective: In this review, we sought to summarize how clinicians and researchers should most appropriately utilize the available HRQOL instruments for bladder cancer. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search of each instrument used in bladder cancer, paying particular attention to the outcomes assessed. We used these outcomes to group the available instruments into categories best reflecting their optimal usage by stage of disease. Results: We found 5 instruments specific to bladder cancer, of which 3 are validated. Only one of the instruments (the EORTC-QLQ-NMIBC24) was involved in a randomized, prospective validation study. The most heavily used instruments are the EORTC-QLQ-BLM30 for muscle-invasive disease and the FACT-Bl which is used across all disease states. Of the 5 available instruments, 4 are automatically administered with general instruments, while the BCI lacks modularity, and requires co-administration with a generalized instrument. Conclusion: There are multiple strong instruments for use in gauging HRQOL in bladder cancer patients. We have divided these instruments into three categories which optimize their usage: instruments for use following NMIBC treatments (EORTC-QLQ-NMIBC24), instruments for use following radical cystectomy (FACT-Bl-Cys and EORTC-QLQ-BLM30) and more inclusive instruments not limited by treatment modality (BCI and FACT-Bl).
| S-EPMC4969686 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCulinary skills are important objects of study in the field of Public Health. Studies that propose to develop instruments for assessing such construct show lack of methodological uniformity to report validity and reliability of their instruments.ObjectiveTo identify studies that have developed instruments to measure culinary skills in adult population, and critically assess their psychometric properties.DesignWe conducted a systematic review according to the PRISMA statement. We searched literature PubMed/Medline, Scopus, LILACS, and Web of Science databases until January 2021, and consulted Google Scholar for relevant grey literature. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, conducted data extraction, and assessed the psychometric quality of the instruments. A third reviewer resolved any doubts or disagreements in all steps of the systematic review.ResultsThe search identified 1148 potentially relevant studies, out of which 9 met the inclusion criteria. In addition, we included 3 studies by searching the related articles and the reference lists of these studies, totaling 12 included studies in this review. Ten studies reported the development of tools measuring culinary skills in adults and 2 studies performed cross-cultural adaptations of original instruments. We considered adequate quality of internal consistency reliability in four studies. One study received adequate rating for test-retest reliability. No studies presented adequate rating for content validity and four studies showed satisfactory results for at least one type of construct validity. One study reported criterion validity and the quality of this psychometric property was inadequate.ConclusionsWe identified many studies that surveyed culinary skills. Although the isolated measures appraised in this review show good promise in terms of quality of psychometric properties, no studies presented adequate measures for each aspect of reliability and validity. A more consistent and consensual definition of culinary skills is recommended. The flaws observed in these studies show that there is a need for ongoing research in the area of the psychometric properties of instruments assessing culinary skills.
| S-EPMC8351978 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundQuality of life (QoL) outcomes are used to monitor quality of care for older adults accessing aged care services, yet it remains unclear which QoL instruments best meet older adults', providers' and policymakers' needs. This review aimed to (1) identify QoL instruments used in aged care and describe them in terms of QoL domains measured and logistical details; (2) summarise in which aged care settings the instruments have been used and (3) discuss factors to consider in deciding on the suitability of QoL instruments for use in aged care services.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from inception to 2021.Eligibility criteriaInstruments were included if they were designed for adults (>18 years), available in English, been applied in a peer-reviewed research study examining QoL outcomes in adults >65 years accessing aged care (including home/social care, residential/long-term care) and had reported psychometrics.Data extraction and synthesisTwo researchers independently reviewed the measures and extracted the data. Data synthesis was performed via narrative review of eligible instruments.Results292 articles reporting on 29 QoL instruments were included. Eight domains of QoL were addressed: physical health, mental health, emotional state, social connection, environment, autonomy and overall QoL. The period between 1990 and 2000 produced the greatest number of newly developed instruments. The EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) and Short Form-series were used across multiple aged care contexts including home and residential care. More recent instruments (eg, ICEpop CAPability measure for Older people (ICECAP-O) and Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT)) tend to capture emotional sentiment towards personal circumstances and higher order care needs, in comparison with more established instruments (eg, EQ-5D) which are largely focused on health status.ConclusionsA comprehensive list of QoL instruments and their characteristics is provided to inform instrument choice for use in research or for care quality assurance in aged care settings, depending on needs and interests of users.
| S-EPMC8603300 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To integrate items from two widely used oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) questionnaires, the General Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) and the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP), as well as culturally-specific items of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) into a four-dimensional OHRQoL model consisting of Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. METHODS:Subjects came from an ancillary study of the Dimensions of Oral Health-Related Quality of Life Project (N=267 patients, mean age±SD: 54.0±17.2years, 58% women.) Patients filled in the original 49 items of OHIP and 22 additional OHRQoL items in a cross-sectional study. These additional items consisted of 7 culturally specific OHIP items and 15 GOHAI or OIDP items with unique content not covered in OHIP-49. Before data collection, three experts hypothesized to which of the four OHRQoL dimensions these items belong. Hypotheses were tested in correlation analyses between the 22 items and the four dimension scores that were derived from OHIP-49. RESULTS:Five of the 22 items did not provide sufficient information to which dimension they belong. In 16 of the remaining 17 items, the pattern of correlation coefficients fitted experts' a priori hypotheses. Acceptance of 16 of the 17 hypotheses was interpreted as evidence that additional (not in OHIP-49 contained) OHRQoL items can be assigned to Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. CONCLUSION:Items of three OHRQoL instruments can be integrated into a dimensional OHRQoL model consisting of Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE:Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact can serve as a simple and clinically appealing set of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) dimensions and therefore provide an opportunity for simpler, but psychometrically improved OHRQoL measurement in the future.
| S-EPMC5028290 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealth economic evaluations support the health care decision-making process by providing information on costs and consequences of health interventions. The quality of such studies is assessed by health economic evaluation (HEE) quality appraisal instruments. At present, there is no instrument for measuring and improving the quality of such HEE quality appraisal instruments. Therefore, the objectives of this study are to establish a framework for assessing the quality of HEE quality appraisal instruments to support and improve their quality, and to apply this framework to those HEE quality appraisal instruments which have been subject to more scrutiny than others, in order to test the framework and to demonstrate the shortcomings of existing HEE quality appraisal instruments.MethodsTo develop the quality assessment framework for HEE quality appraisal instruments, the experiences of using appraisal tools for clinical guidelines are used. Based on a deductive iterative process, clinical guideline appraisal instruments identified through literature search are reviewed, consolidated, and adapted to produce the final quality assessment framework for HEE quality appraisal instruments.ResultsThe final quality assessment framework for HEE quality appraisal instruments consists of 36 items organized within 7 dimensions, each of which captures a specific domain of quality. Applying the quality assessment framework to four existing HEE quality appraisal instruments, it is found that these four quality appraisal instruments are of variable quality.ConclusionsThe framework described in this study should be regarded as a starting point for appraising the quality of HEE quality appraisal instruments. This framework can be used by HEE quality appraisal instrument producers to support and improve the quality and acceptance of existing and future HEE quality appraisal instruments. By applying this framework, users of HEE quality appraisal instruments can become aware of methodological deficiencies inherent in existing HEE quality appraisal instruments. These shortcomings of existing HEE quality appraisal instruments are illustrated by the pilot test.
| S-EPMC3507835 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The World Health Organization has developed a brief generic questionnaire to assess quality of life, the WHOQOL-BREF. It has been studied in diverse groups, but not specifically in older people. The purpose of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of the French version of the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire in healthy older people and to compare the mean profiles of participants with the mean profile obtained in the international validation study of the WHOQOL-BREF. Of the total sample of 262 Swiss French speaking older participants, 122 completed a retest after 2 weeks. The WHOQOL-BREF items demonstrated high test-retest reliability and validity. The WHOQOL-BREF items were differentially related to physical and mental health measures (SF-12 components, morbidity, and depression), thereby demonstrating convergent and discriminant validity. Compared to the international validation sample of the WHOQOL-BREF, participants of the present study reported higher QOL on 22 of the 26 items. A comparison of item profiles between male and female participants revealed gender differences for two items only (social support and negative feelings). We conclude that the psychometric properties of the WHOQOL-BREF items in older adults are good. To consider the 24 specific facets that are assessed by the WHOQOL-BREF appropriately, we recommend using item profiles on the individual and the sample level.
| S-EPMC5546259 | biostudies-other