Suppr超能文献

上气道相关呼吸困难的患者报告结局指标:一项系统评价

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Upper Airway-Related Dyspnea: A Systematic Review.

作者信息

Noud Meaghan, Hovis Kristen, Gelbard Alexander, Sathe Nila A, Penson David F, Feurer Irene D, McPheeters Melissa L, Francis David O

机构信息

Vanderbilt Bill Wilkerson Center, Department of Otolaryngology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.

Vanderbilt Evidence-Based Practice Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.

出版信息

JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Aug 1;143(8):824-831. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2017.0348.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures address the need for patient-centered data and are now used in diverse clinical, research, and policy pursuits. They are important in conditions causing upper airway-related dyspnea in which the patient's reported experience and physiological data can be discrepant.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic review of the literature on upper airway dyspnea-related PRO measures and to rigorously evaluate each measure's developmental properties, validation, and applicability.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

This study strictly adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE via the PubMed interface, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Health and Psychosocial Instruments (HaPI) database were searched using relevant vocabulary terms and key terms related to PRO measures and upper airway-related dyspnea. Three investigators performed abstract review, and 2 investigators independently performed full-text review by applying an established checklist to evaluate the conceptual model, content validity, reliability, construct validity, scoring and interpretability, and respondent burden and presentation of each identified instrument. The initial literature search was conducted in November 2014 and was updated in April 2016.

FINDINGS

Of 1269 studies reviewed, 3 upper airway-related dyspnea PRO measures met criteria for inclusion. One PRO measure was designed de novo to assess upper airway-related dyspnea symptoms and monitor treatment outcomes, while 2 were adapted from established instruments designed for lower airway disease. Measurement properties and psychometric characteristics differed, and none met all checklist criteria. Two met a criterion in each of 7 domains evaluated. Two demonstrated test-retest and internal consistency reliability, and 2 showed that their scores were responsive to change. Thematic deficiencies in current upper airway-related dyspnea PRO measures are lack of patient involvement in item development (content validity), plan for interpretation, and literacy level assessments.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

PRO measures are critical in the assessment of patients with upper airway-related dyspnea. Three instruments with disparate developmental rigor have been designed or adapted to assess this construct. Care must be taken to understand the measurement characteristics and contextual relevance before applying these PRO measures for clinical, research, or quality initiatives.

摘要

重要性

患者报告结局(PRO)指标满足了以患者为中心的数据需求,目前已用于各种临床、研究和政策活动中。在导致上气道相关呼吸困难的病症中,这些指标很重要,因为患者报告的体验和生理数据可能存在差异。

目的

对有关上气道呼吸困难相关PRO指标的文献进行系统综述,并严格评估每个指标的发展特性、有效性和适用性。

证据综述

本研究严格遵循系统综述和Meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南。通过PubMed界面检索MEDLINE、护理及相关健康文献累积索引(CINAHL)以及健康与心理社会测量工具(HaPI)数据库,使用与PRO指标和上气道相关呼吸困难相关的相关词汇和关键词进行检索。三名研究人员进行摘要审查,两名研究人员通过应用既定清单独立进行全文审查,以评估每个已识别工具的概念模型、内容效度、信度、结构效度、评分和可解释性,以及应答者负担和呈现方式。最初的文献检索于2014年11月进行,并于2016年4月更新。

结果

在审查的1269项研究中,有3项上气道相关呼吸困难PRO指标符合纳入标准。一项PRO指标是全新设计的,用于评估上气道相关呼吸困难症状并监测治疗结果,而另外两项是从为下气道疾病设计的既定工具改编而来。测量特性和心理测量特征各不相同,没有一项符合所有清单标准。两项在评估的7个领域中的每个领域都符合一项标准。两项显示了重测信度和内部一致性信度,两项表明其分数对变化有反应。当前上气道相关呼吸困难PRO指标的主题缺陷在于缺乏患者参与项目开发(内容效度)、解释计划和识字水平评估。

结论及相关性

PRO指标在评估上气道相关呼吸困难患者中至关重要。已设计或改编了三项发展严谨程度不同的工具来评估这一结构。在将这些PRO指标应用于临床、研究或质量改进举措之前,必须谨慎了解其测量特征和背景相关性。

相似文献

1
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Upper Airway-Related Dyspnea: A Systematic Review.
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Aug 1;143(8):824-831. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2017.0348.
3
Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 16;1(1):MR000039. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000039.pub2.
4
A systematic review of tools designed for teacher proxy-report of children's physical literacy or constituting elements.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2021 Oct 8;18(1):131. doi: 10.1186/s12966-021-01162-3.
5
Signs and symptoms to determine if a patient presenting in primary care or hospital outpatient settings has COVID-19.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 May 20;5(5):CD013665. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013665.pub3.
6
The measurement and monitoring of surgical adverse events.
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(22):1-194. doi: 10.3310/hta5220.
8
Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 19;10(10):CD012859. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2.
10
Home treatment for mental health problems: a systematic review.
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(15):1-139. doi: 10.3310/hta5150.

引用本文的文献

1
Balloon dilatation is superior to CO laser excision in the treatment of subglottic stenosis.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2023 Jul;280(7):3303-3311. doi: 10.1007/s00405-023-07926-w. Epub 2023 Mar 24.
3
Patient reported outcome measures (PROMS) for body image in dermatology: A systematic review.
Skin Health Dis. 2022 Sep 14;2(4):e167. doi: 10.1002/ski2.167. eCollection 2022 Dec.
4
The Reliability of the Arabic Version of the Dyspnea Index Questionnaire for Upper Airway-Related Dyspnea.
Cureus. 2022 Sep 27;14(9):e29656. doi: 10.7759/cureus.29656. eCollection 2022 Sep.
5
Monitoring Adult Subglottic Stenosis With Spirometry and Dyspnea Index: A Novel Approach.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022 Sep;167(3):517-523. doi: 10.1177/01945998211060817. Epub 2021 Nov 23.
6
Impact of Adjuvant Medical Therapies on Surgical Outcomes in Idiopathic Subglottic Stenosis.
Laryngoscope. 2021 Dec;131(12):E2880-E2886. doi: 10.1002/lary.29675. Epub 2021 Jun 12.
7
Dyspnea Index: An upper airway obstruction instrument; translation and validation in Swedish.
Clin Otolaryngol. 2021 Mar;46(2):380-387. doi: 10.1111/coa.13682. Epub 2021 Jan 3.
8
A visual analog scale for patient-reported voice outcomes: The VAS voice.
Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2019 Dec 17;5(1):90-95. doi: 10.1002/lio2.333. eCollection 2020 Feb.

本文引用的文献

1
Rare Disease Terminology and Definitions-A Systematic Global Review: Report of the ISPOR Rare Disease Special Interest Group.
Value Health. 2015 Sep;18(6):906-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.05.008. Epub 2015 Aug 18.
3
Development and validation of the Dyspnea Index (DI): a severity index for upper airway-related dyspnea.
J Voice. 2014 Nov;28(6):775-82. doi: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.12.017. Epub 2014 Oct 12.
4
Pooling of cross-cultural PRO data in multinational clinical trials: how much can poor measurement affect statistical power?
Qual Life Res. 2015 Feb;24(2):273-7. doi: 10.1007/s11136-014-0765-x. Epub 2014 Sep 5.
5
Standards for talking and thinking about validity.
Psychol Methods. 2013 Sep;18(3):301-19. doi: 10.1037/a0032969. Epub 2013 Jul 8.
7
A community population survey of prevalence and severity of dyspnea in adults.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2009 Oct;38(4):533-45. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2009.01.006.
8
Validation of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire as a psychophysical outcome measure in adult laryngotracheal stenosis.
Clin Otolaryngol. 2009 Aug;34(4):343-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2009.01969.x.
10
Patient-reported outcomes to support medical product labeling claims: FDA perspective.
Value Health. 2007 Nov-Dec;10 Suppl 2:S125-37. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00275.x.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验