Cargando…
Assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma – instruments and methods: a systematic review
OBJECTIVES: We (1) collected instruments that assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), activities of daily living (ADL) and social participation during follow-up after polytrauma, (2) described their use and (3) investigated other relevant patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessed in the studi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8679059/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34916311 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050168 |
_version_ | 1784616436102070272 |
---|---|
author | Ritschel, Michaela Kuske, Silke Gnass, Irmela Andrich, Silke Moschinski, Kai Borgmann, Sandra Olivia Herrmann-Frank, Annegret Metzendorf, Maria-Inti Wittgens, Charlotte Flohé, Sascha Sturm, Johannes Windolf, Joachim Icks, Andrea |
author_facet | Ritschel, Michaela Kuske, Silke Gnass, Irmela Andrich, Silke Moschinski, Kai Borgmann, Sandra Olivia Herrmann-Frank, Annegret Metzendorf, Maria-Inti Wittgens, Charlotte Flohé, Sascha Sturm, Johannes Windolf, Joachim Icks, Andrea |
author_sort | Ritschel, Michaela |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: We (1) collected instruments that assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), activities of daily living (ADL) and social participation during follow-up after polytrauma, (2) described their use and (3) investigated other relevant patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessed in the studies. DESIGN: Systematic Review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guideline. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, as well as the trials registers ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP were searched from January 2005 to April 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All original empirical research published in English or German including PROs of patients aged 18–75 years with an Injury Severity Score≥16 and/or an Abbreviated Injury Scale≥3. Studies with defined injuries or diseases (e.g. low-energy injuries) and some text types (e.g. grey literature and books) were excluded. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were excluded, but references screened for appropriate studies. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction, narrative content analysis and a critical appraisal (e.g. UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) were performed by two reviewers independently. RESULTS: The search yielded 3496 hits; 54 publications were included. Predominantly, HRQoL was assessed, with Short Form-36 Health Survey applied most frequently. ADL and (social) participation were rarely assessed. The methods most used were postal surveys and single assessments of PROs, with a follow-up period of one to one and a half years. Other relevant PRO areas reported were function, mental disorders and pain. CONCLUSIONS: There is a large variation in the assessment of PROs after polytrauma, impairing comparability of outcomes. First efforts to standardise the collection of PROs have been initiated, but require further harmonisation between central players. Additional knowledge on rarely reported PRO areas (e.g. (social) participation, social networks) may lead to their consideration in health services provision. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017060825. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8679059 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86790592022-01-04 Assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma – instruments and methods: a systematic review Ritschel, Michaela Kuske, Silke Gnass, Irmela Andrich, Silke Moschinski, Kai Borgmann, Sandra Olivia Herrmann-Frank, Annegret Metzendorf, Maria-Inti Wittgens, Charlotte Flohé, Sascha Sturm, Johannes Windolf, Joachim Icks, Andrea BMJ Open Public Health OBJECTIVES: We (1) collected instruments that assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), activities of daily living (ADL) and social participation during follow-up after polytrauma, (2) described their use and (3) investigated other relevant patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessed in the studies. DESIGN: Systematic Review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guideline. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, as well as the trials registers ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP were searched from January 2005 to April 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All original empirical research published in English or German including PROs of patients aged 18–75 years with an Injury Severity Score≥16 and/or an Abbreviated Injury Scale≥3. Studies with defined injuries or diseases (e.g. low-energy injuries) and some text types (e.g. grey literature and books) were excluded. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were excluded, but references screened for appropriate studies. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction, narrative content analysis and a critical appraisal (e.g. UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) were performed by two reviewers independently. RESULTS: The search yielded 3496 hits; 54 publications were included. Predominantly, HRQoL was assessed, with Short Form-36 Health Survey applied most frequently. ADL and (social) participation were rarely assessed. The methods most used were postal surveys and single assessments of PROs, with a follow-up period of one to one and a half years. Other relevant PRO areas reported were function, mental disorders and pain. CONCLUSIONS: There is a large variation in the assessment of PROs after polytrauma, impairing comparability of outcomes. First efforts to standardise the collection of PROs have been initiated, but require further harmonisation between central players. Additional knowledge on rarely reported PRO areas (e.g. (social) participation, social networks) may lead to their consideration in health services provision. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017060825. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8679059/ /pubmed/34916311 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050168 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Public Health Ritschel, Michaela Kuske, Silke Gnass, Irmela Andrich, Silke Moschinski, Kai Borgmann, Sandra Olivia Herrmann-Frank, Annegret Metzendorf, Maria-Inti Wittgens, Charlotte Flohé, Sascha Sturm, Johannes Windolf, Joachim Icks, Andrea Assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma – instruments and methods: a systematic review |
title | Assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma – instruments and methods: a systematic review |
title_full | Assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma – instruments and methods: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma – instruments and methods: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma – instruments and methods: a systematic review |
title_short | Assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma – instruments and methods: a systematic review |
title_sort | assessment of patient-reported outcomes after polytrauma – instruments and methods: a systematic review |
topic | Public Health |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8679059/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34916311 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050168 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ritschelmichaela assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT kuskesilke assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT gnassirmela assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT andrichsilke assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT moschinskikai assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT borgmannsandraolivia assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT herrmannfrankannegret assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT metzendorfmariainti assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT wittgenscharlotte assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT flohesascha assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT sturmjohannes assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT windolfjoachim assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview AT icksandrea assessmentofpatientreportedoutcomesafterpolytraumainstrumentsandmethodsasystematicreview |