• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表(POSAS)3.0 患者量表的制定:一项定性研究。

Development of the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) 3.0: a qualitative study.

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC (location VUmc), Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Burn Center and Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Qual Life Res. 2023 Feb;32(2):583-592. doi: 10.1007/s11136-022-03244-6. Epub 2022 Nov 10.

DOI:10.1007/s11136-022-03244-6
PMID:36355319
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9911488/
Abstract

PURPOSE

The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is widely used for measurements of scar quality. This encompasses visual, tactile and sensory characteristics of the scar. The Patient Scale of previous POSAS versions was lacking input from patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop the POSAS3.0, Patient Scale with involvement of adults patients with all scar types, complying with the highest clinimetric standards.

METHODS

From February 2018 to April 2019, a series of six focus group interviews were performed in the Netherlands and Australia to identify scar quality characteristics that adults with scars consider to be important. All focus groups were transcribed, anonymized and analysed using a thematic analysis. Relevant characteristics were formulated into items, resulting in a Dutch and English version of the Patient Scale. These drafts were pilot tested in Australia, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, and refined accordingly.

RESULTS

A total of 21 relevant scar quality characteristics were identified during the focus groups. Two distinct versions of the POSAS3.0, Patient Scale were developed. The Generic version contains 16 items and can be used for all scar types, except linear scars. The Linear Scar version of the Patient Scale contains the same 16 items, with an extra item referring to the widening of scar margins. All included items are rated on a verbal rating scale with five response options.

CONCLUSION

Two versions of the POSAS3.0 Patient Scale were developed. Further field tests are being performed to establish the measurement properties and scoring algorithm of the scales.

摘要

目的

患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表(POSAS)被广泛用于测量瘢痕质量。它包含了瘢痕的视觉、触觉和感觉特征。以前的 POSAS 版本的患者量表缺乏患者的反馈。因此,本研究的目的是开发 POSAS3.0 患者量表,让所有类型瘢痕的成年患者参与其中,并符合最高的临床计量学标准。

方法

从 2018 年 2 月到 2019 年 4 月,在荷兰和澳大利亚进行了一系列 6 次焦点小组访谈,以确定成年人认为重要的瘢痕质量特征。所有焦点小组的讨论内容都被转录、匿名处理,并使用主题分析进行分析。相关特征被归纳为条目,形成了荷兰语和英语版本的患者量表。这些草案在澳大利亚、荷兰和英国进行了试点测试,并进行了相应的改进。

结果

在焦点小组中确定了 21 个与瘢痕质量相关的特征。开发了两种不同版本的 POSAS3.0 患者量表。通用版本包含 16 个条目,可用于所有类型的瘢痕,除了线性瘢痕。患者量表的线性瘢痕版本包含相同的 16 个条目,外加一个关于瘢痕边缘变宽的条目。所有包含的条目都在一个五选项的描述性评分量表上进行评分。

结论

开发了两种版本的 POSAS3.0 患者量表。正在进行进一步的现场测试,以确定这些量表的测量特性和评分算法。

相似文献

1
Development of the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) 3.0: a qualitative study.患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表(POSAS)3.0 患者量表的制定:一项定性研究。
Qual Life Res. 2023 Feb;32(2):583-592. doi: 10.1007/s11136-022-03244-6. Epub 2022 Nov 10.
2
From qualitative data to a measurement instrument: A clarification and elaboration of choices made in the development of the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) 3.0.从定性数据到测量工具:患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表(POSAS)3.0 中患者量表开发过程中所做选择的澄清和阐述。
Burns. 2023 Nov;49(7):1541-1556. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2023.02.009. Epub 2023 Feb 23.
3
Rasch Analysis of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale in Linear Scars: Suggestions for a Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale v2.1.线性瘢痕患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表的 Rasch 分析:患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表 v2.1 的建议。
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Dec;144(6):1073e-1079e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000006265.
4
Predictive validity of short term scar quality on final burn scar outcome using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale in patients with minor to moderate burn severity.使用患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表,评估轻度至中度烧伤严重程度患者短期瘢痕质量对最终烧伤瘢痕结局的预测效度。
Burns. 2017 Jun;43(4):715-723. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2016.10.012. Epub 2016 Dec 28.
5
Patient-and observer-reported long-term scar quality of wide local excision scars in melanoma patients.患者及观察者报告的黑色素瘤患者广泛局部切除瘢痕的长期瘢痕质量
J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2018 Dec;52(6):319-324. doi: 10.1080/2000656X.2018.1493388. Epub 2018 Oct 31.
6
A systematic review of the quality of burn scar rating scales for clinical and research use.烧伤瘢痕评分量表用于临床和研究的质量的系统评价。
Burns. 2012 Feb;38(1):6-18. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2011.09.021. Epub 2011 Nov 1.
7
Differential item functioning in the Observer Scale of the POSAS for different scar types.不同瘢痕类型在POSAS观察者量表中的项目功能差异。
Qual Life Res. 2014 Sep;23(7):2037-45. doi: 10.1007/s11136-014-0637-4. Epub 2014 Feb 9.
8
Cross-cultural adaptation, reproducibility and validation of the Italian version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS).跨文化调适、可重复性和意大利版患者与观察者瘢痕评估量表(POSAS)的验证。
Int Wound J. 2017 Dec;14(6):1262-1268. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12795. Epub 2017 Aug 6.
9
Rasch analysis of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) in burn scars.烧伤瘢痕患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表(POSAS)的 Rasch 分析。
Qual Life Res. 2012 Feb;21(1):13-23. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9924-5. Epub 2011 May 20.
10
Reliability of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale and a 4-point scale in evaluating linear facial surgical scars.患者及观察者瘢痕评估量表与4分制量表在评估面部线性手术瘢痕中的可靠性
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2017 Feb;31(2):341-346. doi: 10.1111/jdv.13805. Epub 2016 Jul 21.

引用本文的文献

1
Air-Botulinum Neurotoxin and Polydeoxyribonucleotide Injections for Acne Scar Treatment.空气肉毒杆菌神经毒素和聚脱氧核糖核苷酸注射治疗痤疮瘢痕
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025 Aug 18. doi: 10.1007/s00266-025-05157-4.
2
Investigating the Efficacy of Layered Moderate Tension Reduction Suturing in Facial Aesthetic Surgery.探讨分层适度减张缝合在面部美容手术中的疗效。
Cureus. 2025 May 28;17(5):e85000. doi: 10.7759/cureus.85000. eCollection 2025 May.
3
Comparison of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems and Conventional Non-Pressure Dressings on Surgical Site Infection Rate After Stoma Reversal: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

本文引用的文献

1
From qualitative data to a measurement instrument: A clarification and elaboration of choices made in the development of the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) 3.0.从定性数据到测量工具:患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表(POSAS)3.0 中患者量表开发过程中所做选择的澄清和阐述。
Burns. 2023 Nov;49(7):1541-1556. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2023.02.009. Epub 2023 Feb 23.
2
Rasch Analysis of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale in Linear Scars: Suggestions for a Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale v2.1.线性瘢痕患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表的 Rasch 分析:患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表 v2.1 的建议。
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Dec;144(6):1073e-1079e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000006265.
3
负压伤口治疗系统与传统非加压敷料对造口回纳术后手术部位感染率影响的比较:随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
J Clin Med. 2025 Feb 28;14(5):1654. doi: 10.3390/jcm14051654.
4
Development of the Observer Scales of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale: An International Delphi Study.患者及观察者瘢痕评估量表的观察者量表开发:一项国际德尔菲研究。
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2025 Feb 28;13(2):e6416. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000006416. eCollection 2025 Feb.
5
Treating Facial Scars using Polydioxanone Threads.使用聚二氧六环酮缝线治疗面部瘢痕
JPRAS Open. 2025 Jan 15;43:497-505. doi: 10.1016/j.jpra.2025.01.006. eCollection 2025 Mar.
6
An Assessment of Current Clinician- and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Acne Scarring and Dyspigmentation: A Scoping Review.痤疮瘢痕和色素沉着的当前临床医生报告及患者报告结局指标评估:一项范围综述
J Invest Dermatol. 2025 Feb 27. doi: 10.1016/j.jid.2025.02.135.
7
Efficiency of Early Sequential Laser Treatment for Facial Linear Scars in Cross-Sectional Regions.面部横断面区域线性瘢痕早期序贯激光治疗的疗效
J Cosmet Dermatol. 2025 Feb;24(2):e70053. doi: 10.1111/jocd.70053.
8
Novel technique and outcomes of umbilical reconstruction during cytoreductive surgery; a multi-centre study.减瘤手术中脐重建的新技术与结果;一项多中心研究。
Tech Coloproctol. 2025 Jan 21;29(1):49. doi: 10.1007/s10151-024-03095-y.
9
Aesthetic Unit Preservation in Emergency Facial Lacerations: A Prospective Evaluation of Landmark-Based Nerve Blocks.急诊面部裂伤中的美学单元保留:基于标志点的神经阻滞的前瞻性评估
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025 Jun;49(11):2915-2924. doi: 10.1007/s00266-025-04664-8. Epub 2025 Jan 14.
10
Hyaluronic acid-based dermal substitute with stromal vascular fraction vs. partial thickness skin grafts for the treatment of intermediate-deep burns of the hand: a retrospective case-control study.基于透明质酸的真皮替代物联合基质血管成分与中厚皮片治疗手部中深度烧伤的回顾性病例对照研究
Ann Burns Fire Disasters. 2024 Dec 31;37(4):305-311. eCollection 2024 Dec.
Systematic Review on the Content of Outcome Measurement Instruments on Scar Quality.
瘢痕质量结局测量工具内容的系统评价
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019 Sep 30;7(9):e2424. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002424. eCollection 2019 Sep.
4
Towards a clinical and empirical definition of burn scarring: A template analysis using qualitative data.迈向烧伤瘢痕的临床与实证定义:一项运用定性数据的模板分析
Burns. 2018 Nov;44(7):1811-1819. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2018.04.006. Epub 2018 Jul 27.
5
COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study.COSMIN 方法学用于评估患者报告结局测量的内容效度:一项德尔菲研究。
Qual Life Res. 2018 May;27(5):1159-1170. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1829-0. Epub 2018 Mar 17.
6
Methodological Aspects of Focus Groups in Health Research: Results of Qualitative Interviews With Focus Group Moderators.健康研究中焦点小组的方法学问题:对焦点小组主持人进行定性访谈的结果
Glob Qual Nurs Res. 2016 Mar 14;3:2333393616630466. doi: 10.1177/2333393616630466. eCollection 2016 Jan-Dec.
7
Applying a Visual Assessment Tool to Facial Linear Scars.将视觉评估工具应用于面部线性瘢痕。
Facial Plast Surg. 2017 Feb;33(1):97-101. doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1597684. Epub 2017 Feb 22.
8
Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments for Surgical and Traumatic Scars: A Systematic Review of their Development, Content, and Psychometric Validation.用于手术和创伤性疤痕的患者报告结局工具:对其开发、内容和心理测量学验证的系统评价
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2016 Oct;40(5):792-800. doi: 10.1007/s00266-016-0642-9. Epub 2016 Jun 29.
9
Clinimetric properties and clinical utility in rehabilitation of postsurgical scar rating scales: a systematic review.术后瘢痕评定量表在康复中的测量学特性及临床应用:一项系统评价
Int J Rehabil Res. 2015 Dec;38(4):279-86. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000134.
10
Values of patients and caregivers for donor site scars: an inter-observer analysis between patients and caregivers and prediction of cosmetic satisfaction.患者和照护者对供区瘢痕的重视程度:患者与照护者之间观察者间分析及其对美容满意度的预测。
Burns. 2012 Sep;38(6):796-801. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2012.04.011. Epub 2012 Jun 4.