1 Warwick Research in Nursing, Department of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, The University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill, Coventry, UK.
2 On behalf of the CHESS team; Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, The University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill, Coventry, UK.
Cephalalgia. 2018 Jun;38(7):1374-1386. doi: 10.1177/0333102417731348. Epub 2017 Sep 18.
Aims To critically appraise, compare and synthesise the quality and acceptability of multi-item patient reported outcome measures for adults with chronic or episodic headache. Methods Systematic literature searches of major databases (1980-2016) to identify published evidence of PROM measurement and practical properties. Data on study quality (COSMIN), measurement and practical properties per measure were extracted and assessed against accepted standards to inform an evidence synthesis. Results From 10,903 reviewed abstracts, 103 articles were assessed in full; 46 provided evidence for 23 PROMs: Eleven specific to the health-related impact of migraine (n = 5) or headache (n = 6); six assessed migraine-specific treatment response/satisfaction; six were generic measures. Evidence for measurement validity and score interpretation was strongest for two measures of impact, Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ v2.1) and Headache Impact Test 6-item (HIT-6), and one of treatment response, the Patient Perception of Migraine Questionnaire (PPMQ-R). Evidence of reliability was limited, but acceptable for the HIT-6. Responsiveness was rarely evaluated. Evidence for the remaining measures was limited. Patient involvement was limited and poorly reported. Conclusion While evidence is limited, three measures have acceptable evidence of reliability and validity: HIT-6, MSQ v2.1 and PPMQ-R. Only the HIT-6 has acceptable evidence supporting its completion by all "headache" populations.
目的 批判性评价、比较和综合评估用于慢性或发作性头痛成人的多项目患者报告结局测量工具的质量和可接受性。
方法 系统检索主要数据库(1980-2016 年)中的文献,以确定发表的关于患者报告结局测量和实际属性的证据。提取研究质量(COSMIN)、每一种测量方法的测量和实际属性的数据,并根据公认的标准进行评估,为证据综合提供信息。
结果 从 10903 篇综述摘要中,有 103 篇文章进行了全面评估;其中 46 篇为 23 种患者报告结局测量工具提供了证据:11 种专门针对偏头痛(n=5)或头痛(n=6)的健康相关影响;6 种评估偏头痛特异性治疗反应/满意度;6 种为通用措施。关于两种影响测量工具(偏头痛特异性生活质量问卷(MSQ v2.1)和头痛影响测试 6 项(HIT-6))和一种治疗反应测量工具(偏头痛患者感知问卷(PPMQ-R))的测量有效性和评分解释的证据最强。关于 HIT-6 的可靠性证据有限,但可接受。响应性很少被评估。其余措施的证据有限。患者参与度有限,且报告情况较差。
结论 虽然证据有限,但有三种测量工具具有可靠和有效的证据:HIT-6、MSQ v2.1 和 PPMQ-R。只有 HIT-6 有足够的证据支持所有“头痛”人群完成该测量。