Cargando…

Patient-Reported Questionnaires to Identify Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review

Background: This systematic review aims to summarise available patient-reported questionnaires to detect adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that can be utilised by healthcare professionals in clinical practice and to summarise the psychometric properties (validity, reliability, and responsiveness) of the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lim, Renly, Ellett, Lisa Kalisch, Roughead, Elizabeth E., Cheah, Phaik Yeong, Masnoon, Nashwa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8624083/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34831635
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182211877
_version_ 1784606086832062464
author Lim, Renly
Ellett, Lisa Kalisch
Roughead, Elizabeth E.
Cheah, Phaik Yeong
Masnoon, Nashwa
author_facet Lim, Renly
Ellett, Lisa Kalisch
Roughead, Elizabeth E.
Cheah, Phaik Yeong
Masnoon, Nashwa
author_sort Lim, Renly
collection PubMed
description Background: This systematic review aims to summarise available patient-reported questionnaires to detect adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that can be utilised by healthcare professionals in clinical practice and to summarise the psychometric properties (validity, reliability, and responsiveness) of the questionnaires. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted using Medline, Pubmed, Embase, and Emcare databases to screen for articles published between January 2000 and July 2020. Data items regarding validity, reliability, and responsiveness were extracted independently by two authors. The methodological quality was assessed using the COSMIN (Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments) checklist. Results: A total of 1563 unique article titles were identified after removing duplicates. Following shortlisting of relevant articles, 19 patient-reported ADR questionnaires were identified. Questionnaires most commonly focused on mental health medications (42.1%, n = 8), followed by general questionnaires applicable to any medication (21.1%, n = 4). Many questionnaires did not report assessing the validity and reliability of the measurement tool. For example, only 11 questionnaires (58%) mentioned assessing content validity, in addition to criterion or construct testing. Conclusion: This systematic review summarised the available patient-reported questionnaires that can be used in research and clinical practice to identify ADRs. Results of this systematic review highlight the need for more robust validity and reliability testing when developing patient-reported ADR questionnaires.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8624083
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86240832021-11-27 Patient-Reported Questionnaires to Identify Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review Lim, Renly Ellett, Lisa Kalisch Roughead, Elizabeth E. Cheah, Phaik Yeong Masnoon, Nashwa Int J Environ Res Public Health Systematic Review Background: This systematic review aims to summarise available patient-reported questionnaires to detect adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that can be utilised by healthcare professionals in clinical practice and to summarise the psychometric properties (validity, reliability, and responsiveness) of the questionnaires. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted using Medline, Pubmed, Embase, and Emcare databases to screen for articles published between January 2000 and July 2020. Data items regarding validity, reliability, and responsiveness were extracted independently by two authors. The methodological quality was assessed using the COSMIN (Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments) checklist. Results: A total of 1563 unique article titles were identified after removing duplicates. Following shortlisting of relevant articles, 19 patient-reported ADR questionnaires were identified. Questionnaires most commonly focused on mental health medications (42.1%, n = 8), followed by general questionnaires applicable to any medication (21.1%, n = 4). Many questionnaires did not report assessing the validity and reliability of the measurement tool. For example, only 11 questionnaires (58%) mentioned assessing content validity, in addition to criterion or construct testing. Conclusion: This systematic review summarised the available patient-reported questionnaires that can be used in research and clinical practice to identify ADRs. Results of this systematic review highlight the need for more robust validity and reliability testing when developing patient-reported ADR questionnaires. MDPI 2021-11-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8624083/ /pubmed/34831635 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182211877 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Lim, Renly
Ellett, Lisa Kalisch
Roughead, Elizabeth E.
Cheah, Phaik Yeong
Masnoon, Nashwa
Patient-Reported Questionnaires to Identify Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review
title Patient-Reported Questionnaires to Identify Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review
title_full Patient-Reported Questionnaires to Identify Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Patient-Reported Questionnaires to Identify Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Patient-Reported Questionnaires to Identify Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review
title_short Patient-Reported Questionnaires to Identify Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review
title_sort patient-reported questionnaires to identify adverse drug reactions: a systematic review
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8624083/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34831635
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182211877
work_keys_str_mv AT limrenly patientreportedquestionnairestoidentifyadversedrugreactionsasystematicreview
AT ellettlisakalisch patientreportedquestionnairestoidentifyadversedrugreactionsasystematicreview
AT rougheadelizabethe patientreportedquestionnairestoidentifyadversedrugreactionsasystematicreview
AT cheahphaikyeong patientreportedquestionnairestoidentifyadversedrugreactionsasystematicreview
AT masnoonnashwa patientreportedquestionnairestoidentifyadversedrugreactionsasystematicreview