Lucas Gallo, Charlene Rae, Sophocles Voineskos, Nina Vestergaard Simonsen, Andrea L. Pusic, Lotte Poulsen, Jens Ahm Sørensen, Anne F. Klassen, Stefan J. Cano
{"title":"WOUND-Q 的进一步心理计量评估:响应性研究","authors":"Lucas Gallo, Charlene Rae, Sophocles Voineskos, Nina Vestergaard Simonsen, Andrea L. Pusic, Lotte Poulsen, Jens Ahm Sørensen, Anne F. Klassen, Stefan J. Cano","doi":"10.1111/wrr.13179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The WOUND‐Q is a modular patient‐reported outcome measure (PROM) with 13 scales measuring constructs across 4 domains (i.e., wound characteristics, health related quality of life, experience of care and wound treatment). The psychometrics of the WOUND‐Q were previously assessed and the 13 scales evidenced good validity and reliability. However, the responsiveness (i.e., ability to detect clinical change) of the WOUND‐Q has yet to be assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate responsiveness for 9 WOUND‐Q scales that assess outcomes, in a sample of people 18 years of age or older with chronic wounds that were present for at least 3 months. This study conducted a 4 month follow‐up of 421 participants who completed the WOUND‐Q as part of a previous psychometric study. Participants completed an online survey answering questions about their current wound state (e.g., number, type, size, smell, drainage), anchor questions about change, as well as the WOUND‐Q scales that they had completed in their initial assessment. Pre‐defined hypotheses were tested with a 75% acceptance threshold indicating sufficient evidence of responsiveness. Minimally important differences (MIDs) were also calculated using both anchor‐based and distribution‐based methods. Of 390 invited participants, 320 provided responses, ranging in age from 19 to 84 years. Acceptance of hypotheses ranged from 60% to 100%, with only the Symptom scale not meeting the 75% threshold. The findings of this study provide evidence that the WOUND‐Q can validly measure clinical change in patients with chronic wounds.","PeriodicalId":23864,"journal":{"name":"Wound Repair and Regeneration","volume":"112 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Further psychometric evaluation of the WOUND‐Q: A responsiveness study\",\"authors\":\"Lucas Gallo, Charlene Rae, Sophocles Voineskos, Nina Vestergaard Simonsen, Andrea L. Pusic, Lotte Poulsen, Jens Ahm Sørensen, Anne F. Klassen, Stefan J. Cano\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/wrr.13179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The WOUND‐Q is a modular patient‐reported outcome measure (PROM) with 13 scales measuring constructs across 4 domains (i.e., wound characteristics, health related quality of life, experience of care and wound treatment). The psychometrics of the WOUND‐Q were previously assessed and the 13 scales evidenced good validity and reliability. However, the responsiveness (i.e., ability to detect clinical change) of the WOUND‐Q has yet to be assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate responsiveness for 9 WOUND‐Q scales that assess outcomes, in a sample of people 18 years of age or older with chronic wounds that were present for at least 3 months. This study conducted a 4 month follow‐up of 421 participants who completed the WOUND‐Q as part of a previous psychometric study. Participants completed an online survey answering questions about their current wound state (e.g., number, type, size, smell, drainage), anchor questions about change, as well as the WOUND‐Q scales that they had completed in their initial assessment. Pre‐defined hypotheses were tested with a 75% acceptance threshold indicating sufficient evidence of responsiveness. Minimally important differences (MIDs) were also calculated using both anchor‐based and distribution‐based methods. Of 390 invited participants, 320 provided responses, ranging in age from 19 to 84 years. Acceptance of hypotheses ranged from 60% to 100%, with only the Symptom scale not meeting the 75% threshold. The findings of this study provide evidence that the WOUND‐Q can validly measure clinical change in patients with chronic wounds.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23864,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Wound Repair and Regeneration\",\"volume\":\"112 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Wound Repair and Regeneration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.13179\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CELL BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wound Repair and Regeneration","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.13179","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CELL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Further psychometric evaluation of the WOUND‐Q: A responsiveness study
The WOUND‐Q is a modular patient‐reported outcome measure (PROM) with 13 scales measuring constructs across 4 domains (i.e., wound characteristics, health related quality of life, experience of care and wound treatment). The psychometrics of the WOUND‐Q were previously assessed and the 13 scales evidenced good validity and reliability. However, the responsiveness (i.e., ability to detect clinical change) of the WOUND‐Q has yet to be assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate responsiveness for 9 WOUND‐Q scales that assess outcomes, in a sample of people 18 years of age or older with chronic wounds that were present for at least 3 months. This study conducted a 4 month follow‐up of 421 participants who completed the WOUND‐Q as part of a previous psychometric study. Participants completed an online survey answering questions about their current wound state (e.g., number, type, size, smell, drainage), anchor questions about change, as well as the WOUND‐Q scales that they had completed in their initial assessment. Pre‐defined hypotheses were tested with a 75% acceptance threshold indicating sufficient evidence of responsiveness. Minimally important differences (MIDs) were also calculated using both anchor‐based and distribution‐based methods. Of 390 invited participants, 320 provided responses, ranging in age from 19 to 84 years. Acceptance of hypotheses ranged from 60% to 100%, with only the Symptom scale not meeting the 75% threshold. The findings of this study provide evidence that the WOUND‐Q can validly measure clinical change in patients with chronic wounds.
期刊介绍:
Wound Repair and Regeneration provides extensive international coverage of cellular and molecular biology, connective tissue, and biological mediator studies in the field of tissue repair and regeneration and serves a diverse audience of surgeons, plastic surgeons, dermatologists, biochemists, cell biologists, and others.
Wound Repair and Regeneration is the official journal of The Wound Healing Society, The European Tissue Repair Society, The Japanese Society for Wound Healing, and The Australian Wound Management Association.