Current status of patient-reported outcome measures in vascular surgery.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hicks CW
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9834908 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Current status of patient-reported outcome measures in vascular surgery.
Hicks Caitlin W CW Vavra Ashley K AK Goldsborough Earl E Rebuffatti Michelle M Almeida Jose J Duwayri Yazan M YM Haurani Mounir M Ross Charles B CB Shah Samir K SK Shireman Paula K PK Smolock Christopher J CJ Yi Jeniann J Woo Karen K
Journal of vascular surgery 20211101 5
A previously published review focused on generic and disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) relevant to vascular surgery but limited to arterial conditions. The objective of this project was to identify all available PROMs relevant to diseases treated by vascular surgeons and to evaluate vascular surgeon perceptions, barriers to widespread implementation, and concerns regarding PROMs. We provide an overview of what a PROM is and how they are developed, and summarize currently ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesThe present study aimed to explore the impact of different periodontal surgical treatments on the quality of life and postoperative morbidity.Materials and methodsThe present study is a single-center, prospective, observational cohort trial. One hundred fifty-five patients, referred to the Periodontal Department of Bologna University who needed periodontal surgical treatment, were recruited. The self-reported perception of the postoperative course was assessed using the following anonymous questionnaires: Italian oral health impact profile (I-OHIP-14), visual analog scale (VAS) to evaluate the intensity of the pain, and 5-point Likert scale.ResultsPatients reported a mean OHIP-14 total score of 9.87±8.5 (range 0-42), significantly influenced by the female sex, flap extension, and periodontal dressing. A mean VAS score of 2.96±2.39 (range 0-9) was calculated, and was found to be influenced by the presence of vertical releasing incisions and palatal flap extension. Of the 155 subjects, 40 (25.8%) patients reported bleeding as a post-surgical complication, 96 (61.9%) swelling, 105 (67.7%) eating discomfort, and 44 (28.4%) reported speech discomfort.ConclusionsWithin the limitations of the nature of the present study, periodontal surgical procedures have a low impact on patients' quality of life evaluated through the OHIP-14 and VAS pain questionnaires.Clinical relevancePeriodontal surgical procedures are safe procedures, with a limited duration of postoperative discomfort as well as the incidence of complications.
| S-EPMC10713745 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSurgical procedures incorporating a cosmetic element such as septorhinoplasty and otoplasty are currently under threat in the National Health Service (NHS) as they are deemed to be procedures of 'limited clinical benefit' by many primary care providers. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), which assess the quality of care delivered from the patients' perspective, are becoming increasingly important in documenting the effectiveness of such procedures.MethodsThe Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire, a validated PROM tool, was used to assess patient satisfaction in 141 patients undergoing septorhinoplasty surgery over a 90-month period at the University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust.ResultsOverall, 100 patients with a mean follow-up period of 36 months completed the study. The mean ROE score was 73.3%. In addition, 75% of patients questioned were happy with the final result of their operation and 83% would undergo the procedure again if required. These benefits occurred irrespective of age, sex and primary versus revision surgery, and were maintained for up to 71 months following surgery.ConclusionsThis study has shown that patients are generally satisfied with their functional and cosmetic outcomes following septorhinoplasty surgery. These results help support the case for septorhinoplasty surgery to continue being funded as an NHS procedure.
| S-EPMC4473903 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcomes are essential to understanding success in plastic surgery procedures, many that aim to improve quality of life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) should be written at or below the sixth-grade reading level recommended by the American Medical Association. This study aimed to evaluate the readability of plastic surgery PROMs.MethodsWe conducted a literature review to identify validated, commonly used PROMs in plastic surgery. We extracted PROMs' text and instructions and analyzed readability using different approaches that estimate the grade level required to understand. Our primary outcome was the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) index, which detects word complexity and expects 100% comprehension at the grade level rating assigned. We also included the Flesch-Kincaid grade level, Coleman-Liau index, and automated readability index.ResultsForty-three PROMs met the inclusion criteria. The mean SMOG index was 8.2 (SD = 1.3), indicating an eighth-grade reading level. Mean reading grade levels measured by the Flesch-Kincaid grade level, Coleman-Liau index, and automated readability index ranged from third to sixth grade, although these may underestimate readability difficulties. Only 6 (14%) PROMs had a SMOG index at or below the sixth-grade level. PROM instructions had significantly higher reading levels than the questions/responses for all readability indexes (P < 0.01).ConclusionsPROMs used in plastic surgery, including the instructions, exceed the reading level recommended by the American Medical Association. This may limit comprehension and accurate completion and compromise validity and reliability. PROMs should be written and designed to be accessible to patients of all literacy levels.
| S-EPMC11661722 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This review article systematically reviews the use of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Vitreoretinal surgery, with the aim of recommending a preferred PROM-tool for use in clinical practice. Vitreoretinal surgery lags behind other ophthalmic subspecialties in the adoption of PROMs as a core outcome measure of success post-operatively. Current outcomes rely heavily on post-operative Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) and anatomical success on imaging modalities such as Ocular Coherence Tomography (OCT), despite the link between each of these measures and patient satisfaction being uncertain. We systematically reviewed the available literature in March 2021, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, searching six databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, APA PsycINFO, SCOPUS and Cochrane Library. Critical appraisal of PROM-tools was facilitated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias checklist. We identified 14 eligible original research papers that used PROMs as a primary or secondary outcome of success post-operatively in patients having undergone vitreoretinal surgery. Eight different generic and vision-related PROM-tools were identified as being used in vitreoretinal studies, none of which were vitreoretinal-disease-specific. Our review article considers whether generic-health PROMs (e.g., EQ5D) or vision-related PROMs (e.g. NEI VFQ-25) are precise or responsive enough following vitreoretinal surgery to have a meaningful impact on clinical or research practice. We also consider the importance of standardisation of clinical outcomes in vitreoretinal clinical trials.
| S-EPMC9905525 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/aimsCrohn's disease is an inflammatory bowel disease with up to 50 per cent of patients requiring surgery within 10 years of diagnosis. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are vital to monitor and assess patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This systematic review aims to evaluate PROMs within studies for perioperative Crohn's disease patients.MethodsArticles from MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare and CINAHL databases were searched to find studies relating to the assessment of HRQoL in perioperative Crohn's disease patients using PROMs and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) from 1st January 2015 to 22nd October 2023. Bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool was used for non-randomized interventional studies and the Cochrane RoB2 tool was used for randomized trials.Results1714 journal articles were filtered down to eight studies. Six studies focused on ileocaecal resection, one on perianal fistulas and one on the effects of cholecystectomy on patients with Crohn's disease. Within these articles, ten different PROM tools were identified (8 measures of HRQoL and 2 measures of functional outcome). Overall improvements in patient HRQoL pre- to postoperative for ileocaecal Crohn's disease were found in both paediatric and adult patients. Outcomes were comparable in patients in remission, with or without stoma, but were worse in patients with a stoma and active disease.ConclusionThere are significant variations in how PROMs are used to evaluate perioperative Crohn's disease outcomes and a need for consensus on how tools are used. Routine assessments using an internationally accepted online platform can be used to monitor patients and support areas of treatment pathways that require further support to ensure high standards of care. They also enable future statistical comparisons in quantitative reviews and meta-analyses.
| S-EPMC10601451 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROM) evoke measurements that allow capturing patients' perspectives on their condition. In endometriosis care, physicians' understanding of the effect of the disease and the treatment on patients is often poor. The use of PROMs in endometriosis clinical practice can facilitate patient-provider communication and the implementation of patient-centered care, improve patients' quality of life, as well as provide a tool for patients' self-management of the disease. Today, PROMs are extensively used in research and clinical trials, however they are barely used in clinical practice. The development of digital tools facilitating capturing PROMs can contribute to their use by physicians in routine endometriosis care. However, all PROMs are not adapted to be used in routine care in the context of endometriosis. The objective of this study was to present a catalogue of available PROMs for routine endometriosis care and evaluate them according to selected criteria. To do so, we explored the different PROMs currently in the literature. Consequently, 48 PROM were identified as tools used to evaluate various dimensions of the impact of endometriosis on patients. The selected PROMs were evaluated for their potential to be used as a standard in clinical practice in endometriosis. The selected catalogue of PROMs is the starting point for the integration of digital tools to capture PROMs and the development of patient-centered dashboards to be used by patients and clinicians in endometriosis care and self-management to improve care processes, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and outcomes.
| S-EPMC8585017 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe routine collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) promises to improve patient care. However, in colorectal surgery, PROMs are uncommonly collected outside of clinical research studies and rarely used in clinical care. We designed and implemented a quality improvement project with the goals of routinely collecting PROMs and increasing the frequency that PROMs are utilized by colorectal surgeons in clinical practice.MethodsThis mixed-methods, quality improvement project was conducted in the colorectal surgery clinic of a tertiary academic medical center. Patients were administered up to five PROMs before each appointment. PROM completion rates were measured. Additionally, we performed two educational interventions to increase utilization of our electronic health record's PROM dashboard by colorectal surgeons. Utilization rates and attitudes toward the PROM dashboard were measured.ResultsOverall, patients completed 3600 of 3977 (90.9%) administered PROMs during the study period. At baseline, colorectal surgeons reviewed 6.7% of completed PROMs. After two educational interventions, this increased to 39.3% (P = 0.004). Colorectal surgeons also felt that the PROM dashboard was easier to use. Barriers to greater PROM dashboard utilization included poor user interface/user experience and a perceived lack of knowledge, time, and relevance.ConclusionsThe collection of PROMs in colorectal surgery clinics is feasible and can result in high PROM completion rates. Educational interventions can improve the utilization of PROMs by colorectal surgeons in clinical practice. Our experience collecting PROMs through this quality improvement initiative can serve as a template for other colorectal surgery clinics interested in collecting and utilizing data from PROMs.
| S-EPMC9588722 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hip preservation surgery is rapidly advancing and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are becoming an integral part of measuring treatment effectiveness. Traditionally the modified Harris hip score has been used as the main outcome measure. More recently, new PRO tools in the field have been developed. We performed a systematic review of the English literature from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and SPORTDiscus databases to identify the PRO tools used in hip preservation surgery. Our aim was to critically appraise the quality of the questionnaire properties in order to recommend the most appropriate PRO tool for future use. Measurement properties of each PRO questionnaire were rated from excellent to poor, based on Terwee criteria and the results from the included studies. Six PRO tools were identified with description or comparison of their measurement properties in 10 articles. While, most recently developed PRO tools, the hip outcome score (HOS), the Copenhagen hip and groin outcome score (HAGOS) and the international hip outcome tool (iHOT-33) scored better than the others in their measurement properties, iHOT-33 scored the best of all the PRO tools and is recommended for future use in hip preservation surgery.
| S-EPMC4718480 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is growing interest in using patient-reported outcome measures to support value-based care in colorectal surgery. To draw valid conclusions regarding patient-reported outcomes data, measures with robust measurement properties are required.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the use and quality of patient-reported outcome measures in colorectal surgery.Data sourcesThree major databases were searched for studies using patient-reported outcome measures in the context of colorectal surgery.Study selectionArticles that used patient-reported outcome measures as outcome for colorectal surgical intervention in a comparative effectiveness analysis were included. Exclusion criteria included articles older than 11 years, non-English language, age <18 years, fewer than 40 patients, case reports, review articles, and studies without comparison.Main outcome measuresThis was a quality assessment using a previously reported checklist of psychometric properties.ResultsFrom 2007 to 2018, 368 studies were deemed to meet inclusion criteria. These studies used 165 distinct patient-reported outcome measures. Thirty were used 5 or more times and were selected for quality assessment. Overall, the measures were generally high quality, with 21 (70%) scoring ≥14 on an 18-point scale. Notable weaknesses included management of missing data (14%) and description of literacy level (0%).LimitationsThe study was limited by its use of original articles for quality assessment. Measures were selected for quality analysis based on frequency of use rather than other factors, such as impact of the article or number of patients in the study.ConclusionsPatient-reported outcome measures are widely used in colorectal research. There was a wide range of measures available, and many were used only once. The most frequently used measures are generally high quality, but a majority lack details on how to deal with missing data and information on literacy levels. As the use of patient-reported outcome measures to assess colorectal surgical intervention increases, researchers and practitioners need to become more knowledgeable about the measures available and their quality.
| S-EPMC8029646 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study Design Bibliometric analysis. Objective To determine trends, frequency, and distribution of patient-reported outcome instruments (PROIs) in degenerative cervical spine surgery literature over the past decade. Methods A search was conducted via PubMed from 2004 to 2013 on five journals (The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, The Bone and Joint Journal, The Spine Journal, European Spine Journal, and Spine), which were chosen based on their impact factors and authors' consensus. All abstracts were screened and articles addressing degenerative cervical spine surgery using PROIs were included. Articles were then analyzed for publication date, study design, journal, level of evidence, and PROI trends. Prevalence of PROIs and level of evidence of included articles were analyzed. Results From 19,736 articles published, 241 articles fulfilled our study criteria. Overall, 53 distinct PROIs appeared. The top seven most frequently used PROIs were: Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (104 studies), visual analog scale for pain (100), Neck Disability Index (72), Short Form-36 (38), Nurick score (25), Odom criteria (21), and Oswestry Disability Index (15). Only 11 PROIs were used in 5 or more articles. Thirty-three of the PROIs were appeared in only 1 article. Among the included articles, 16% were of level 1 evidence and 32% were of level 4 evidence. Conclusion Numerous PROIs are currently used in degenerative cervical spine surgery. A consensus on which instruments to use for a given diagnosis or procedure is lacking and may be necessary for better communication and comparison, as well as for the accumulation and analysis of vast clinical data across multiple studies.
| S-EPMC4836929 | biostudies-other