Hanna Lydia, Jha Rama, Sounderajah Viknesh, Markar Sheraz, Gibbs Richard
Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK; Imperial Vascular Unit, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
School of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2023 Sep;66(3):343-350. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2023.06.032. Epub 2023 Jun 29.
To systematically identify all patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) (quality of life [QOL] instruments or other instrument/methodology) that have been used to date in aortic dissection (AD) and to explore how well these instruments evaluate QOL according to the Consensus based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology or guideline.
Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were search on 1st July 2022.
This scoping review was undertaken according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) and the COSMIN guidelines for performing systematic reviews of validated PROMs. Studies that reported on any aspect or domain of QOL using a PROM or other instrument or methodology on AD were included. Data synthesis, including psychometric property analysis and risk of bias assessment were performed according to COSMIN guidelines.
Forty-five studies, published between 1994 and 2021 reporting on 5 874 patients (mean age 63 years, 70.6% male), were included. A total of 39 PROMs were used, and three studies used semi-structured interviews. The majority (69%) of studies were in patients with type A aortic dissection (TAAD). The most common PROM used was the SF-36 (51%). Six studies evaluated one or more psychometric properties of a PROM. Only one of these studies was specifically designed as a validation study. No study reported on content validity. Internal consistency was the most evaluated psychometric property. No study evaluated all the psychometric properties according to COSMIN methodology. The methodological quality used to assess these PROMs was judged to be adequate or very good.
This review highlights the heterogeneity of PROMs or methods used to determine QOL in AD patients. The lack of research regarding a comprehensive evaluation of the psychometric properties of a PROM used in AD highlights the need for the development and validation of a dissection specific PROM. [PROSPERO registration no. CRD42022310477].
系统识别迄今为止在主动脉夹层(AD)中使用的所有患者报告结局测量指标(PROMs)(生活质量[QOL]工具或其他工具/方法),并根据基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)方法或指南,探讨这些工具对生活质量的评估效果。
2022年7月1日检索了Embase、MEDLINE、PsycINFO、CINAHL和Cochrane图书馆。
本范围综述根据系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目扩展版(PRISMA-ScR)以及COSMIN关于对已验证的PROMs进行系统评价的指南进行。纳入报告使用PROM或其他工具或方法对AD患者生活质量的任何方面或领域进行研究。根据COSMIN指南进行数据综合,包括心理测量学特性分析和偏倚风险评估。
纳入了1994年至2021年间发表的45项研究,报告了5874例患者(平均年龄63岁,70.6%为男性)。共使用了39种PROMs,3项研究使用了半结构化访谈。大多数(69%)研究针对的是A型主动脉夹层(TAAD)患者。最常用的PROM是SF-36(51%)。6项研究评估了一种PROM的一种或多种心理测量学特性。其中只有一项研究专门设计为验证研究。没有研究报告内容效度。内部一致性是评估最多的心理测量学特性。没有研究根据COSMIN方法评估所有心理测量学特性。用于评估这些PROMs的方法学质量被判定为充分或非常好。
本综述强调了用于确定AD患者生活质量的PROMs或方法的异质性。缺乏对AD中使用的PROM的心理测量学特性进行全面评估的研究,凸显了开发和验证特定于夹层的PROM的必要性。[PROSPERO注册号:CRD42022310477]