Cargando…
Minimizing population health loss due to scarcity in OR capacity: validation of quality of life input
OBJECTIVES: A previously developed decision model to prioritize surgical procedures in times of scarce surgical capacity used quality of life (QoL) primarily derived from experts in one center. These estimates are key input of the model, and might be more context-dependent than the other input param...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9887555/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36721106 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01818-z |
_version_ | 1784880363809538048 |
---|---|
author | Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y. van Hof, Kira S. Krijkamp, Eline Asselman, Franck Leemans, C. René van Alphen, Anouk M.I.A. van der Horst, Henriëtte Widdershoven, Guy de Jong, Leonie Baatenburg Lingsma, Hester Busschbach, Jan de Jong, Rob Baatenburg |
author_facet | Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y. van Hof, Kira S. Krijkamp, Eline Asselman, Franck Leemans, C. René van Alphen, Anouk M.I.A. van der Horst, Henriëtte Widdershoven, Guy de Jong, Leonie Baatenburg Lingsma, Hester Busschbach, Jan de Jong, Rob Baatenburg |
author_sort | Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: A previously developed decision model to prioritize surgical procedures in times of scarce surgical capacity used quality of life (QoL) primarily derived from experts in one center. These estimates are key input of the model, and might be more context-dependent than the other input parameters (age, survival). The aim of this study was to validate our model by replicating these QoL estimates. METHODS: The original study estimated QoL of patients in need of commonly performed procedures in live expert-panel meetings. This study replicated this procedure using a web-based Delphi approach in a different hospital. The new QoL scores were compared with the original scores using mixed effects linear regression. The ranking of surgical procedures based on combined QoL values from the validation and original study was compared to the ranking based solely on the original QoL values. RESULTS: The overall mean difference in QoL estimates between the validation study and the original study was − 0.11 (95% CI: -0.12 - -0.10). The model output (DALY/month delay) based on QoL data from both studies was similar to the model output based on the original data only: The Spearman’s correlation coefficient between the ranking of all procedures before and after including the new QoL estimates was 0.988. DISCUSSION: Even though the new QoL estimates were systematically lower than the values from the original study, the ranking for urgency based on health loss per unit of time delay of procedures was consistent. This underscores the robustness and generalizability of the decision model for prioritization of surgical procedures. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01818-z. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9887555 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98875552023-01-31 Minimizing population health loss due to scarcity in OR capacity: validation of quality of life input Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y. van Hof, Kira S. Krijkamp, Eline Asselman, Franck Leemans, C. René van Alphen, Anouk M.I.A. van der Horst, Henriëtte Widdershoven, Guy de Jong, Leonie Baatenburg Lingsma, Hester Busschbach, Jan de Jong, Rob Baatenburg BMC Med Res Methodol Research OBJECTIVES: A previously developed decision model to prioritize surgical procedures in times of scarce surgical capacity used quality of life (QoL) primarily derived from experts in one center. These estimates are key input of the model, and might be more context-dependent than the other input parameters (age, survival). The aim of this study was to validate our model by replicating these QoL estimates. METHODS: The original study estimated QoL of patients in need of commonly performed procedures in live expert-panel meetings. This study replicated this procedure using a web-based Delphi approach in a different hospital. The new QoL scores were compared with the original scores using mixed effects linear regression. The ranking of surgical procedures based on combined QoL values from the validation and original study was compared to the ranking based solely on the original QoL values. RESULTS: The overall mean difference in QoL estimates between the validation study and the original study was − 0.11 (95% CI: -0.12 - -0.10). The model output (DALY/month delay) based on QoL data from both studies was similar to the model output based on the original data only: The Spearman’s correlation coefficient between the ranking of all procedures before and after including the new QoL estimates was 0.988. DISCUSSION: Even though the new QoL estimates were systematically lower than the values from the original study, the ranking for urgency based on health loss per unit of time delay of procedures was consistent. This underscores the robustness and generalizability of the decision model for prioritization of surgical procedures. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01818-z. BioMed Central 2023-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9887555/ /pubmed/36721106 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01818-z Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y. van Hof, Kira S. Krijkamp, Eline Asselman, Franck Leemans, C. René van Alphen, Anouk M.I.A. van der Horst, Henriëtte Widdershoven, Guy de Jong, Leonie Baatenburg Lingsma, Hester Busschbach, Jan de Jong, Rob Baatenburg Minimizing population health loss due to scarcity in OR capacity: validation of quality of life input |
title | Minimizing population health loss due to scarcity in OR capacity: validation of quality of life input |
title_full | Minimizing population health loss due to scarcity in OR capacity: validation of quality of life input |
title_fullStr | Minimizing population health loss due to scarcity in OR capacity: validation of quality of life input |
title_full_unstemmed | Minimizing population health loss due to scarcity in OR capacity: validation of quality of life input |
title_short | Minimizing population health loss due to scarcity in OR capacity: validation of quality of life input |
title_sort | minimizing population health loss due to scarcity in or capacity: validation of quality of life input |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9887555/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36721106 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01818-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gravesteijnbenjaminy minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT vanhofkiras minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT krijkampeline minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT asselmanfranck minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT leemanscrene minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT vanalphenanoukmia minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT vanderhorsthenriette minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT widdershovenguy minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT dejongleoniebaatenburg minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT lingsmahester minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT busschbachjan minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput AT dejongrobbaatenburg minimizingpopulationhealthlossduetoscarcityinorcapacityvalidationofqualityoflifeinput |