Francis David O, Daniero James J, Hovis Kristen L, Sathe Nila, Jacobson Barbara, Penson David F, Feurer Irene D, McPheeters Melissa L
Vanderbilt Voice Center, Department of Otolaryngology, Bill Wilkerson Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TNCenter for Surgical Quality and Outcomes Research, Nashville, TNVanderbilt Evidence-Based Practice Center, Nashville, TN.
Center for Voice and Swallowing, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017 Jan 1;60(1):62-88. doi: 10.1044/2016_JSLHR-S-16-0022.
The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive systematic review of the literature on voice-related patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in adults and to evaluate each instrument for the presence of important measurement properties.
MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Health and Psychosocial Instrument databases were searched using relevant vocabulary terms and key terms related to PRO measures and voice. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed in consultation with an expert panel. Three independent investigators assessed study methodology using criteria developed a priori. Measurement properties were examined and entered into evidence tables.
A total of 3,744 studies assessing voice-related constructs were identified. This list was narrowed to 32 PRO measures on the basis of predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Questionnaire measurement properties varied widely. Important thematic deficiencies were apparent: (a) lack of patient involvement in the item development process, (b) lack of robust construct validity, and (c) lack of clear interpretability and scaling.
PRO measures are a principal means of evaluating treatment effectiveness in voice-related conditions. Despite their prominence, available PRO measures have disparate methodological rigor. Care must be taken to understand the psychometric and measurement properties and the applicability of PRO measures before advocating for their use in clinical or research applications.
本研究旨在对关于成人声音相关患者报告结局(PRO)测量的文献进行全面系统的综述,并评估每种工具是否具备重要的测量属性。
使用与PRO测量和声音相关的相关词汇术语及关键词,检索MEDLINE、护理及相关健康文献累积索引和健康与心理社会工具数据库。与一个专家小组协商制定了纳入和排除标准。三名独立研究人员使用事先制定的标准评估研究方法。检查测量属性并录入证据表。
共识别出3744项评估声音相关结构的研究。根据预定的纳入和排除标准,该列表缩小至32项PRO测量。问卷测量属性差异很大。明显存在重要的主题缺陷:(a)患者未参与项目开发过程,(b)缺乏可靠的结构效度,以及(c)缺乏清晰的可解释性和量表。
PRO测量是评估声音相关疾病治疗效果的主要手段。尽管它们很突出,但现有的PRO测量在方法严谨性上存在差异。在提倡将其用于临床或研究应用之前,必须谨慎了解PRO测量的心理测量和测量属性以及适用性。