Suppr超能文献

诱发型外阴痛的结局测量工具:系统评价。

Outcome Measurement Instruments for Provoked Vulvodynia: A Systematic Review.

机构信息

Dermatology Department, The Royal Women's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.

Health Sciences Library, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.

出版信息

J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2018 Oct;22(4):396-404. doi: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000418.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to detail the outcome measurement instruments used in randomized control trials and observational studies investigating therapeutic interventions for provoked vulvodynia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched Ovid Medline, Embase, Emcare, and PyschINFO libraries from database inception through April 2017. We included randomized control trials and observational studies of provoked vulvodynia that used instruments to measure the outcome of therapeutic interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 2299 articles were retrieved and 25 were eligible for inclusion in accordance with the selection criteria. The included studies measured 26 different outcomes, using 110 outcome measurement instruments. Patient-reported outcomes were most commonly measured (144/166, 86%), followed by physician-reported outcomes (20/166, 12%). The most commonly measured outcomes were patient-reported psychological impact of disease (27/166, 16%), patient-reported improvement in dyspareunia (25/166, 15%), and patient-reported reduction in pain (24/166, 14%). The Pain Catastrophizing Scale, the Beck Depression Inventory, and the State Trait Anxiety Questionnaire were the most commonly used instruments to measure psychological impact.The most commonly measured clinician-rated outcome was an improvement in pain (17/166, 10%), which was most frequently assessed by the cotton swab test. Only 34 (31%) outcome measurement instruments were specific to vulvodynia (26/110, 23%) or sexual functioning (8/110, 7%).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a wide range of outcome measurement instruments used in provoked vulvodynia studies, resulting in inconsistency of reporting and difficulty in comparing and combining findings for systemic review. There is a pressing need for the development of validated, reliable instruments and consensus on a core outcome set for further research purposes.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在详细介绍治疗性干预措施治疗诱发型外阴痛的随机对照试验和观察性研究中使用的结局测量工具。

材料和方法

我们检索了 Ovid Medline、Embase、Emcare 和 PyschINFO 数据库,检索时间从数据库建立到 2017 年 4 月。我们纳入了使用工具来测量治疗干预结局的诱发型外阴痛的随机对照试验和观察性研究。

结果

共检索到 2299 篇文章,根据选择标准,有 25 篇符合纳入标准。纳入的研究共测量了 26 种不同的结局,使用了 110 种结局测量工具。患者报告结局最常被测量(144/166,86%),其次是医生报告结局(20/166,12%)。最常被测量的结局是疾病对患者心理影响的报告(27/166,16%)、性交痛改善的报告(25/166,15%)和疼痛减轻的报告(24/166,14%)。疼痛灾难化量表、贝克抑郁量表和状态特质焦虑问卷是最常用于测量心理影响的工具。最常被测量的临床医生评估结局是疼痛改善(17/166,10%),最常通过棉签试验进行评估。只有 34 种(31%)结局测量工具是专门针对外阴痛(26/110,23%)或性功能(8/110,7%)的。

结论

在诱发型外阴痛研究中使用了广泛的结局测量工具,导致报告不一致,难以对系统评价中的发现进行比较和综合。因此迫切需要开发验证有效的、可靠的工具,并就核心结局集达成共识,以进一步开展研究。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验