Search

Aim: To develop and explore the validity of a Patient Reported Experience Measure (PREM) for adult inpatient diabetes care. Method: 27 in‐depth interviews were conducted to inform the development of the 42‐item PREM which was cognitively tested with 10 people. A refined 38‐item PREM was piloted with 228 respondents completing a paper (n = 198) or online (n = 30) version. The performance of the PREM was evaluated by exploring (i) uptake/number of responses and (ii) survey validity by investigating whether the PREM data were of adequate quality and delivered useful information. Results: The PREM had low drop‐out or missing data rates suggesting it was appropriately constructed. Analysis of item frequencies and variances, and problem score calculations concluded that questions provided sufficient score differentiation. Conclusions: This new PREM allows for experiences of inpatient diabetes care to be measured, understood and reported on to help identify priority areas for improving care quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hip and knee replacement are effective procedures for end-stage arthritis that has not responded to medical management. However, until now, there have been no validated, patient-reported tools to measure early recovery in this growing patient population. The process of development and psychometric evaluation of the Oxford Arthroplasty Early Recovery Score (OARS), a 14-item patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) measuring health status, and the Oxford Arthroplasty Early Change Score (OACS) a 14-item measure to assess change during the first 6 weeks following surgery is reported. Patients and methods: A five-phased, best practice, iterative approach was used. From a literature based starting point, qualitative interviews with orthopaedic healthcare professionals, were then performed ascertaining if and how clinicians would use such a PROM and change measure. Analysis of in-depth patient-interviews in phase one identified important patient-reported factors in early recovery which were used to provide questionnaire themes. In Phase two, candidate items from Phase One interviews were generated and pilot questionnaires developed and tested. Exploratory factor analysis with item reduction and final testing of the questionnaires was performed in phase three. Phase Four involved validation testing. Results: Qualitative interviews (n = 22) with orthopaedic healthcare professionals, helped determine views of potential users, and guide structure. In Phase One, factors from patient interviews (n = 30) were used to find questionnaire themes and generate items. Pilot questionnaires were developed and tested in Phase Two. Items were refined in the context of cognitive debrief interviews (n = 34) for potential inclusion in the final tools. Final testing of questionnaire properties with item reduction (n = 168) was carried out in phase three. Validation of the OARS and OACS was performed in phase four. Both measures were administered to consecutive patients (n = 155) in an independent cohort. Validity and reliability were assessed. Psychometric testing showed positive results, in terms of internal consistency and sensitivity to change, content validity and relevance to patients and clinicians. In addition, these measures have been found to be acceptable to patients throughout early recovery with validation across the 6 week period. Conclusions: These brief, easy-to-use tools could be of great use in assessing recovery pathways and interventions in arthroplasty surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used in mental healthcare research for quality of life assessment but most fail to capture the breadth of health and non-health domains that can be impacted. We report the psychometric validation of a novel, multi-dimensional instrument based on Amartya Sen's capability approach intended for use as an outcome measure in mental health research.Methods: The Oxford Capabilities Questionnaire for Mental Health (OxCAP-MH) is a 16-item self-complete capability measure that covers multiple domains of functioning and welfare. Data for validation of the instrument were collected through a national randomised controlled trial of community treatment orders for patients with psychosis. Complete OxCAP-MH data were available for 172 participants. Internal consistency was established with Cronbach's alpha; an interclass correlation coefficient was used to assess test-retest reliability in a sub-sample (N = 50) tested one week apart. Construct validity was established by comparing OxCAP-MH total scores with established instruments of illness severity and functioning: EuroQol (EQ-5D), Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) and Objective Social Outcomes Index (SIX). Sensitivity was established by calculating standard error of measurement using distributional methods.Results: The OxCAP-MH showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.79) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.86). Convergent validity was evidenced by strong correlations with the EQ-5D (VAS 0.52, p < .001) (Utility 0.45, p < .001), and divergent validity through more modest associations with the BPRS (-0.41, p < .001), GAF (0.24, p < .001) and SIX (0.12, p = ns). A change of 9.2 points on a 0-100 scale was found to be meaningful on statistical grounds.Conclusions: The OxCAP-MH has demonstrable reliability and construct validity and represents a promising multi-dimensional alternative to existing patient-reported outcome measures for quality of life used in mental health research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Williams and colleagues reported that DBS surgery for patients with advanced PD improves motor function and quality of life compared to best medical therapy alone at 1 year, but with surgery-related side effects in a minority. This article reports on the economic evaluation alongside this trial.Methods: Detailed resource use and quality of life over 12 months after randomization was obtained from the trial reported by Williams and colleagues. Outcomes were measured using the EQ-5D and quality-adjusted life years calculated.Results: Year 1 costs for surgery were significantly higher than in best medical therapy, at £19,069 compared to £9,813, a difference of £9,256 (95% confidence interval [CI]: £7,625, £10,887). There was a small, significant gain in utility at 1 year but a statistically insignificant gain of 0.02 quality-adjusted life years (95% CI: -0.015, 0.05) in the surgical arm. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year of surgery at 1 year was £468,528. Extrapolation reveals that after 5 years, this ratio is likely to reduce to £45,180, but subsequently rise to £70,537 at 10 years owing to the increased probability of battery replacements (and re-replacements) beyond 5 years.Conclusion: In this patient group, DBS is not cost-effective at 1 year. Extrapolation, however, reveals an increasing likelihood of cost-effectiveness up to 5 years and reducing cost-effectiveness between 5 and 10 years. These models are sensitive to assumptions about future costs and quality-adjusted life years gained. © 2016 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are designed to assess patients' perceived health states or health-related quality of life. However, PROMs are susceptible to missing data, which can affect the validity of conclusions from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). This review aims to assess current practice in the handling, analysis and reporting of missing PROMs outcome data in RCTs compared to contemporary methodology and guidance. Methods: This structured review of the literature includes RCTs with a minimum of 50 participants per arm. Studies using the EQ-5D-3L, EORTC QLQ-C30, SF-12 and SF-36 were included if published in 2013; those using the less commonly implemented HUI, OHS, OKS and PDQ were included if published between 2009 and 2013. Results: The review included 237 records (4-76 per relevant PROM). Complete case analysis and single imputation were commonly used in 33 and 15 % of publications, respectively. Multiple imputation was reported for 9 % of the PROMs reviewed. The majority of publications (93 %) failed to describe the assumed missing data mechanism, while low numbers of papers reported methods to minimise missing data (23 %), performed sensitivity analyses (22 %) or discussed the potential influence of missing data on results (16 %). Conclusions: Considerable discrepancy exists between approved methodology and current practice in handling, analysis and reporting of missing PROMs outcome data in RCTs. Greater awareness is needed for the potential biases introduced by inappropriate handling of missing data, as well as the importance of sensitivity analysis and clear reporting to enable appropriate assessments of treatment effects and conclusions from RCTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient reports or ratings are essential for measuring the quality of patient care. Measures designed for this purpose tend to focus on the processes and structures of care rather than the outcomes of it. The latter is arguably the most valid indicator of the quality of care patients receive. Typically this information is gathered by probing patient satisfaction with treatment as part of an investigation of satisfaction with hospital care. More recently patient ratings of the outcome of treatment have been obtained to measure treatment efficacy in clinical trials. However, a more direct approach is to ask patients to assess the benefit of treatment on their current health status. We performed a structured literature review on patient reported satisfaction with outcomes of treatment and direct patient assessments of the same. The purpose of this was to identify suitable candidate questions for a short instrument to tap patient evaluations of in-patient hospital interventions. Articles were included if they dealt with patient satisfaction or patient assessment of outcomes of treatment. Articles were excluded if they dealt more generally with patient satisfaction with care. We identified 169 papers, 79 were included in the review. The findings of this review suggest that there are a number of benefits of directly asking patients to assess the outcome of hospital treatment. Importantly this approach reflects outcomes relevant to the patient and is also more likely to reflect patient report in routine clinical practice. There is also evidence that such approaches have face validity and construct validity. The problems associated with this approach (i.e. response bias), are those common to patient reported outcome surveys, but employing appropriate strategies can minimize them. Furthermore, employing a simple set of questions that asks patients to assess outcomes of treatment they receive can be time and resource efficient in comparison to administering lengthy measures. This approach could be tested for potential generic use as an evaluative measure for patients in hospital settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a guideline for individuals who are keen to use patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) locally. It is noted that PROMs are intended to measure patients' perceptions of their own functional status and wellbeing. For those who are planning to use PROMs, they are advised to consider the content of the questionnaire and its relevance to the intended form of usage and patient group. The article also discusses data collection and storage and minimising missing and duplicated data.

Background The evidence base for forensic mental health (FMH) services has been developing since the late 1990s. Are outcome measures sound enough for the evaluation tasks? Aims To identify, from published literature, outcome measures used in FMH research and, where feasible, assess their quality. Method A structured review was undertaken of trials and intervention studies published between 1990 and 2006. Details of outcome variables and measures were abstracted. Evidence regarding most frequently occurring outcome measures was assessed. Results Four hundred and fifty different instruments were used to assess outcomes, incorporating 1038 distinct variables. Very little evidence could be found to support the measurement properties of commonly used instruments. Conclusions and implications for practice There is little consistency in the use of outcome measure in FMH research. Effort is required to reach consensus on validated outcome measures in this field in order to better inform practice. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Part I. Examines and compares the outcome of patients who receive hospital at home care to that of those who receive inpatient hospital care. Methods used to assess the outcome of the patients; Increase in demand for acute hospital beds; Reference to the increase in the number of emergency medical admissions. INSET: Key messages.

Background: Comparisons between neurological conditions have the potential to inform service providers by identifying particular areas of difficulty experienced by affected individuals. This study aimed to identify predictors of activity and participation in people with motor neurone disease (MND), people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and people with Parkinson's Disease (PD).Methods: The Oxford Participation and Activities Questionnaire (Ox-PAQ) and Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Survey (MOS SF-36) were administered by postal survey to 386 people with a confirmed diagnosis of MND, MS or PD. Data analyses focused on stepwise regression analyses in order to identify predictors of activity and participation in the three conditions assessed.Results: Three hundred and thirty four participants completed the survey, a response rate of 86.5%. Regression analyses identified multiple predictors of activity and participation dependent on Ox-PAQ domain and disease group, the most prominent being social and physical functioning as measured by the MOS SF-36.Conclusions: Results indicate that the physical and social consequences of neurological illness are of greatest relevance to people experiencing the conditions assessed. Whilst the largely inevitable physical implications of disease take hold, emphasis should be placed on the avoidance of social withdrawal and isolation, and the maintenance of social engagement should become a significant priority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two letters to the editor are presented in response to the article "Validity, Reliability and Responsiveness of a Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score" by M. Cöster et al.

The article presents information on a study which determined whether patient reported outcomes are relevant to the clinical interpretation of results from contemporary cardiovascular trials, and whether investigators use them appropriately. It explains that patient reported outcomes assist to assess the effect of interventions from the perspectives of patients. Data analyzed were from ten medical and cardiology journals published between January 2005 and December 2008. The findings of the study are presented.

Objective: Health-related websites have developed to be much more than information sites: they are used to exchange experiences and find support as well as information and advice. This paper documents the development of a tool to compare the potential consequences and experiences a person may encounter when using health-related websites.Methods: Questionnaire items were developed following a review of relevant literature and qualitative secondary analysis of interviews relating to experiences of health. Item reduction steps were performed on pilot survey data (n=167). Tests of validity and reliability were subsequently performed (n=170) to determine the psychometric properties of the questionnaire.Results: Two independent item pools entered psychometric testing: (1) Items relating to general views of using the internet in relation to health and, (2) Items relating to the consequences of using a specific health-related website. Identified sub-scales were found to have high construct validity, internal consistency and test-retest reliability.Conclusion: Analyses confirmed good psychometric properties in the eHIQ-Part 1 (11 items) and the eHIQ-Part 2 (26 items).Practice Implications: This tool will facilitate the measurement of the potential consequences of using websites containing different types of material (scientific facts and figures, blogs, experiences, images) across a range of health conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The objectives of this systematic review were 1) to identify studies that assess the psychometric performance of the English-language version of 35 generic multidimensional patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for children and young people in general populations and evaluate their quality and 2) to summarize the psychometric properties of each PROM. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched. The methodological quality of the articles was assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist. For each PROM, extracted evidence of content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, proxy reliability, responsiveness, and precision was judged against standardized reference criteria. Results We found no evidence for 14 PROMs. For the remaining 21 PROMs, 90 studies were identified. The methodological quality of most studies was fair. Quality was generally rated higher in more recent studies. Not reporting how missing data were handled was the most common reason for downgrading the quality. None of the 21 PROMs has had all psychometric properties evaluated; data on construct validity and internal consistency were most frequently reported. Conclusions Overall, consistent positive findings for at least five psychometric properties were found for Child Health and Illness Profile, Healthy Pathways, KIDSCREEN, and Multi-dimensional Student Life Satisfaction Scale. None of the PROMs had been evaluated for responsiveness to detect change in general populations. Further well-designed studies with transparent reporting of methods and results are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To identify generic, multidimensional patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for children up to 18 years old and describe their characteristics and content assessed using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Children and Youth version (ICF-CY). Methods The search strategy, developed by an information specialist, included four groups of terms related to “measure,” “health,” “children and young people,” and “psychometric performance.” The search was limited to publications from 1992. Five electronic databases and two online-specific PROM databases were searched. Two groups of reviewers independently screened all abstracts for eligible PROMs. Descriptive characteristics of the eligible PROMs were collected, and items and domains of each questionnaire were mapped onto the ICF-CY chapters. Results We identified 35 PROMs, of which 29 were generic PROMs and 6 were preference-based measures. Many PROMs cover a range of aspects of health; however, social functioning is represented most often. Content covered differs both in which aspects of health are assessed and whether individual questions focus on functioning (what the subject can or does do) and/or well-being (how the subject feels about a certain aspect of his or her health). Conclusions A broad variety of PROMs is available to assess children’s health. Nevertheless, only a few PROMs can be used across all age ranges to 18 years. When mapping their content on the ICF-CY, it seems that most PROMs exclude at least one major domain, and all conflate aspects of functioning and well-being in the scales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To ascertain the smallest amounts of change for the three Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) domains that are likely to be clinically meaningful and beyond measurement error for conditions affecting the foot/ankle. Estimates were compared with those from the Short-Form 36 (SF-36). Study Design and Setting: A prospective observational study of 671 consecutive patients undergoing foot or ankle surgery at an orthopedic hospital. Before and 9 months after surgery, patients completed the MOXFQ and SF-36; transition items (anchor) asked about perceived changes in foot/ankle pain or problems since the surgery. Results: Four hundred ninety-one patients completed pre- and postoperative questionnaires. Anchor-based minimal clinically important change (MCIC) values were ~13 points for each of the MOXFQ Walking/standing (W/S), Pain, and Social Interaction (S-I) domains [and greater than the standard error of measurement (SEM)]. MCIC values for all SF-36 domains fell within the SEM. Between-group MCIDs for the MOXFQ were W/S, 16.2; Pain, 9.9; S-I, 9.3. Distribution-based minimal detectable change (MDC90) values for the MOXFQ were ~11, ~12, and ~16 score points for the W/S, Pain, and S-I scales, respectively. Conclusion: This article provides information for aiding the interpretability of MOXFQ outcomes data and for planning future studies. The SF-36 is not recommended as a primary outcome for foot/ankle surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined whether there are advantages in terms of outcome assessment of using Rasch methods of scoring the 12-item Oxford Hip Score questionnaire over conventionally summed scores. Data were collected on patients receiving total hip replacement surgery. Three patient groups were created according to surgery type: primary, revision, and re-revision; two groups were created according to satisfaction with surgery: very satisfied and dissatisfied. Analyses were performed to test the relative precision (RP) of Rasch scoring versus conventionally summed scores in discriminating the groups experiencing different types of surgery and level of satisfaction. At the 1-year follow-up, RP ratios favored the Rasch scoring method in both tests of discrimination. Considerable gains in precision were achieved with Rasch scoring methods when groups were compared in a cross-sectional way. Alternative approaches to scoring questionnaires should be investigated to better assess comparisons over time. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]