IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Quality of Life Research Pub Date : 2025-01-27 DOI:10.1007/s11136-025-03899-x
Motahareh Karimijashni, Shokoofih Abbasalipour, Marie Westby, Tim Ramsay, Paul E Beaulé, Stéphane Poitras
{"title":"Patient involvement in the development of patient-reported outcome measures used following hip or knee arthroplasty: a scoping review.","authors":"Motahareh Karimijashni, Shokoofih Abbasalipour, Marie Westby, Tim Ramsay, Paul E Beaulé, Stéphane Poitras","doi":"10.1007/s11136-025-03899-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Involving patients in developing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is essential for accurately capturing their perspectives. However, understanding how patients were involved in developing PROMs used after hip or knee arthroplasty is limited. This scoping review aimed to evaluate whether patients were involved in the development of these PROMs and how they were involved.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two independent reviewers documented patient involvement in item development and comprehensibility testing for 50 PROMs used after hip or knee arthroplasty. Trends in patient involvement over time were analyzed using binary logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no documentation of patient involvement in a collaborative role during the PROM development processes. Regarding the consultative role, of these 26 PROMs, they contributed to item development in 13 PROMs (26%) and comprehensibility testing in four PROMs (8%) and both item development and comprehensibility testing in nine PROMs (18%). Patients who underwent arthroplasty were involved in one or both phases in ten PROMs (20%), while patients with other lower extremity conditions were involved in 16 PROMs (32%). Patients who underwent arthroplasty contributed to both phases in five PROMs: Oxford Knee Score-Activity and Participation Questionnaire, Patient's Knee Implant Performance Questionnaire, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System R-Plus-Osteoarthritis of the Knee, Oxford Arthroplasty Early Recovery Score and Oxford Arthroplasty Early Change Score. In addition, our analysis revealed no significant change in patient involvement in a consultative role during either item development or comprehensibility evaluation over time since 1982, when the first PROM included in this review was developed (p = 0.21).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Almost half of PROMs used after arthroplasty did not involve patients in their development, highlighting the need to address this gap in development of PROMs. There is also a need to analyze PROMs to ensure they accurately reflect the outcomes that matter to patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-025-03899-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:让患者参与制定患者报告结果指标(PROMs)对于准确捕捉患者的观点至关重要。然而,人们对患者如何参与制定髋关节或膝关节置换术后使用的患者报告结局指标的了解还很有限。本范围综述旨在评估患者是否参与了这些PROMs的开发,以及他们是如何参与的:两名独立评审员记录了患者参与髋关节或膝关节置换术后使用的 50 个 PROM 的项目开发和可理解性测试的情况。采用二元逻辑回归分析了患者参与度随时间变化的趋势:结果:在 PROM 的开发过程中,没有记录显示患者参与了合作角色。关于咨询角色,在这26份PROM中,患者参与了13份PROM的项目开发(26%)和4份PROM的可理解性测试(8%),以及9份PROM的项目开发和可理解性测试(18%)。接受关节置换术的患者参与了 10 份 PROM 的一个或两个阶段(20%),而患有其他下肢疾病的患者参与了 16 份 PROM(32%)。接受关节置换术的患者在五个PROM中参与了两个阶段:牛津膝关节评分--活动和参与问卷、患者膝关节植入表现问卷、患者报告结果测量信息系统R-Plus--膝关节骨性关节炎、牛津关节置换术早期恢复评分和牛津关节置换术早期变化评分。此外,我们的分析表明,自1982年本综述所包含的首个PROM开发以来,患者在项目开发或可理解性评估过程中参与咨询的情况没有明显变化(p = 0.21):结论:在关节置换术后使用的 PROM 中,几乎有一半没有让患者参与开发,这说明有必要解决 PROM 开发中的这一不足。此外,还需要对PROM进行分析,以确保它们能准确反映患者所关心的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Patient involvement in the development of patient-reported outcome measures used following hip or knee arthroplasty: a scoping review.

Purpose: Involving patients in developing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is essential for accurately capturing their perspectives. However, understanding how patients were involved in developing PROMs used after hip or knee arthroplasty is limited. This scoping review aimed to evaluate whether patients were involved in the development of these PROMs and how they were involved.

Methods: Two independent reviewers documented patient involvement in item development and comprehensibility testing for 50 PROMs used after hip or knee arthroplasty. Trends in patient involvement over time were analyzed using binary logistic regression.

Results: There was no documentation of patient involvement in a collaborative role during the PROM development processes. Regarding the consultative role, of these 26 PROMs, they contributed to item development in 13 PROMs (26%) and comprehensibility testing in four PROMs (8%) and both item development and comprehensibility testing in nine PROMs (18%). Patients who underwent arthroplasty were involved in one or both phases in ten PROMs (20%), while patients with other lower extremity conditions were involved in 16 PROMs (32%). Patients who underwent arthroplasty contributed to both phases in five PROMs: Oxford Knee Score-Activity and Participation Questionnaire, Patient's Knee Implant Performance Questionnaire, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System R-Plus-Osteoarthritis of the Knee, Oxford Arthroplasty Early Recovery Score and Oxford Arthroplasty Early Change Score. In addition, our analysis revealed no significant change in patient involvement in a consultative role during either item development or comprehensibility evaluation over time since 1982, when the first PROM included in this review was developed (p = 0.21).

Conclusions: Almost half of PROMs used after arthroplasty did not involve patients in their development, highlighting the need to address this gap in development of PROMs. There is also a need to analyze PROMs to ensure they accurately reflect the outcomes that matter to patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Quality of Life Research
Quality of Life Research 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
224
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality of Life Research is an international, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the rapid communication of original research, theoretical articles and methodological reports related to the field of quality of life, in all the health sciences. The journal also offers editorials, literature, book and software reviews, correspondence and abstracts of conferences. Quality of life has become a prominent issue in biometry, philosophy, social science, clinical medicine, health services and outcomes research. The journal''s scope reflects the wide application of quality of life assessment and research in the biological and social sciences. All original work is subject to peer review for originality, scientific quality and relevance to a broad readership. This is an official journal of the International Society of Quality of Life Research.
期刊最新文献
Delineating the dyadic coping process in HIV serodiscordant male couples: a dyadic daily diary study using the common fate model. Self-compassion, mindfulness, and emotion regulation predict multiple dimensions of quality of life in US post-9/11 veterans. Psychometric properties and post-hoc CAT analysis of the pediatric PROMIS® item banks anxiety and depressive symptoms in a combined Swedish Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and School sample. Post COVID-19 infection and quality of life of healthcare workers at Sahloul University Hospital of Sousse in Tunisia. Relations between trajectories of weight loss and changes in psychological health over a period of 2 years following bariatric metabolic surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1