Cargando…
Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Outpatient Postpartum Recovery: A Systematic Review
IMPORTANCE: Outpatient postpartum recovery is an underexplored area of obstetrics. There is currently no consensus regarding which patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) clinicians and researchers should use to evaluate postpartum recovery. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate PROMs of outpatient postpartum reco...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Medical Association
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8160591/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34042993 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.11600 |
_version_ | 1783700313955368960 |
---|---|
author | Sultan, Pervez Sharawi, Nadir Blake, Lindsay Ando, Kazuo Sultan, Ellile Aghaeepour, Nima Carvalho, Brendan Sadana, Nishant |
author_facet | Sultan, Pervez Sharawi, Nadir Blake, Lindsay Ando, Kazuo Sultan, Ellile Aghaeepour, Nima Carvalho, Brendan Sadana, Nishant |
author_sort | Sultan, Pervez |
collection | PubMed |
description | IMPORTANCE: Outpatient postpartum recovery is an underexplored area of obstetrics. There is currently no consensus regarding which patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) clinicians and researchers should use to evaluate postpartum recovery. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate PROMs of outpatient postpartum recovery using Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. EVIDENCE REVIEW: An initial literature search performed in July 2019 identified postpartum recovery PROMs and validation studies. A secondary search in July 2020 identified additional validation studies. Both searches were performed using 4 databases (Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and CINAHL), with no date limiters. Studies with PROMs evaluating more than 3 proposed outpatient postpartum recovery domains were considered. Studies were included if they assessed any psychometric measurement property of the included PROMs in the outpatient postpartum setting. The PROMs were assessed for the following 8 psychometric measurement properties, as defined by COSMIN: content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity and measurement invariance, reliability, measurement error, hypothesis testing, and responsiveness. Psychometric measurement properties were evaluated in each included study using the COSMIN criteria by assessing (1) the quality of the methods (very good, adequate, doubtful, inadequate, or not assessed); (2) overall rating of results (sufficient, insufficient, inconsistent, or indeterminate); (3) level of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations assessment tool; and (4) level of recommendation, which included class A (recommended for use; showed adequate content validity with at least low-quality evidence for sufficient internal consistency), class B (not class A or class C), or class C (not recommended). FINDINGS: In total, 15 PROMs (7 obstetric specific and 8 non–obstetric specific) were identified, evaluating outpatient postpartum recovery in 46 studies involving 19 165 women. The majority of psychometric measurement properties of the included PROMs were graded as having very-low-level or low-level evidence. The best-performing PROMs that received class A recommendations were the Maternal Concerns Questionnaire, the Postpartum Quality of Life tool, and the World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF. The remainder of the evaluated PROMs had insufficient evidence to make recommendations regarding their use (and received class B recommendations). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This review found that the best-performing PROMs currently available to evaluate outpatient postpartum recovery were the Maternal Concerns Questionnaire, the Postpartum Quality of Life tool, and the World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF; however, these tools all had significant limitations. This study highlights the need to focus future efforts on robustly developing and validating a new PROM that may comprehensively evaluate outpatient postpartum recovery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8160591 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | American Medical Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81605912021-06-17 Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Outpatient Postpartum Recovery: A Systematic Review Sultan, Pervez Sharawi, Nadir Blake, Lindsay Ando, Kazuo Sultan, Ellile Aghaeepour, Nima Carvalho, Brendan Sadana, Nishant JAMA Netw Open Original Investigation IMPORTANCE: Outpatient postpartum recovery is an underexplored area of obstetrics. There is currently no consensus regarding which patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) clinicians and researchers should use to evaluate postpartum recovery. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate PROMs of outpatient postpartum recovery using Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. EVIDENCE REVIEW: An initial literature search performed in July 2019 identified postpartum recovery PROMs and validation studies. A secondary search in July 2020 identified additional validation studies. Both searches were performed using 4 databases (Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and CINAHL), with no date limiters. Studies with PROMs evaluating more than 3 proposed outpatient postpartum recovery domains were considered. Studies were included if they assessed any psychometric measurement property of the included PROMs in the outpatient postpartum setting. The PROMs were assessed for the following 8 psychometric measurement properties, as defined by COSMIN: content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity and measurement invariance, reliability, measurement error, hypothesis testing, and responsiveness. Psychometric measurement properties were evaluated in each included study using the COSMIN criteria by assessing (1) the quality of the methods (very good, adequate, doubtful, inadequate, or not assessed); (2) overall rating of results (sufficient, insufficient, inconsistent, or indeterminate); (3) level of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations assessment tool; and (4) level of recommendation, which included class A (recommended for use; showed adequate content validity with at least low-quality evidence for sufficient internal consistency), class B (not class A or class C), or class C (not recommended). FINDINGS: In total, 15 PROMs (7 obstetric specific and 8 non–obstetric specific) were identified, evaluating outpatient postpartum recovery in 46 studies involving 19 165 women. The majority of psychometric measurement properties of the included PROMs were graded as having very-low-level or low-level evidence. The best-performing PROMs that received class A recommendations were the Maternal Concerns Questionnaire, the Postpartum Quality of Life tool, and the World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF. The remainder of the evaluated PROMs had insufficient evidence to make recommendations regarding their use (and received class B recommendations). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This review found that the best-performing PROMs currently available to evaluate outpatient postpartum recovery were the Maternal Concerns Questionnaire, the Postpartum Quality of Life tool, and the World Health Organization Quality of Life–BREF; however, these tools all had significant limitations. This study highlights the need to focus future efforts on robustly developing and validating a new PROM that may comprehensively evaluate outpatient postpartum recovery. American Medical Association 2021-05-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8160591/ /pubmed/34042993 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.11600 Text en Copyright 2021 Sultan P et al. JAMA Network Open. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. |
spellingShingle | Original Investigation Sultan, Pervez Sharawi, Nadir Blake, Lindsay Ando, Kazuo Sultan, Ellile Aghaeepour, Nima Carvalho, Brendan Sadana, Nishant Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Outpatient Postpartum Recovery: A Systematic Review |
title | Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Outpatient Postpartum Recovery: A Systematic Review |
title_full | Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Outpatient Postpartum Recovery: A Systematic Review |
title_fullStr | Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Outpatient Postpartum Recovery: A Systematic Review |
title_full_unstemmed | Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Outpatient Postpartum Recovery: A Systematic Review |
title_short | Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Assess Outpatient Postpartum Recovery: A Systematic Review |
title_sort | use of patient-reported outcome measures to assess outpatient postpartum recovery: a systematic review |
topic | Original Investigation |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8160591/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34042993 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.11600 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sultanpervez useofpatientreportedoutcomemeasurestoassessoutpatientpostpartumrecoveryasystematicreview AT sharawinadir useofpatientreportedoutcomemeasurestoassessoutpatientpostpartumrecoveryasystematicreview AT blakelindsay useofpatientreportedoutcomemeasurestoassessoutpatientpostpartumrecoveryasystematicreview AT andokazuo useofpatientreportedoutcomemeasurestoassessoutpatientpostpartumrecoveryasystematicreview AT sultanellile useofpatientreportedoutcomemeasurestoassessoutpatientpostpartumrecoveryasystematicreview AT aghaeepournima useofpatientreportedoutcomemeasurestoassessoutpatientpostpartumrecoveryasystematicreview AT carvalhobrendan useofpatientreportedoutcomemeasurestoassessoutpatientpostpartumrecoveryasystematicreview AT sadananishant useofpatientreportedoutcomemeasurestoassessoutpatientpostpartumrecoveryasystematicreview |