From the Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Behavioral Research Program, Basic Biobehavioral and Psychological Sciences Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland (RB); University of Toronto, Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, Toronto, Canada (LV); University Health Network, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Cancer Rehabilitation and Survivorship Program, Toronto, Canada (SA, YJ, GAT, DEH, AL, JMJ); Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California (AGS); Mrs T.H. Chan Division of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California (CK); West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine, Lewisburg, West Virginia (AS); Department of Occupational Therapy, Institute of Health Professions, Boston, Massachusetts (SW, KDL); Duquesne University, School of Nursing, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania; Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (GC); Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada (KLC); and Veterans Affairs, Office of Research and Development, Health Systems Research, Washington, District of Columbia (LP).
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2023 Nov 1;102(11):1029-1033. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000002324. Epub 2023 Aug 18.
Clear reporting of cancer rehabilitation interventions is critical for interpreting and translating research into clinical practice. This study sought to examine the completeness of intervention reporting of cancer rehabilitation interventions addressing disability and to identify which elements are most frequently missing. This was a secondary analysis of randomized controlled trials included in two systematic reviews examining effectiveness of cancer rehabilitation interventions that address cancer-related disability, including functional outcomes. Eligible trials were reviewed for intervention reporting rigor using the Criteria for Reporting the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions in Healthcare 2 checklist. Intervention descriptions for cancer rehabilitation interventions were generally incomplete. Approximately 85% ( n = 157) of trials described ≤50% of Criteria for Reporting the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions in Healthcare 2 checklist items. Commonly underreported items included description of the intervention's underlying theoretical basis, fidelity, description of process evaluation or external conditions influencing intervention delivery, and costs or required resources for intervention delivery. The findings reveal that cancer rehabilitation intervention descriptions lacked necessary detail in this body of literature. Poor descriptions limit the translation of research to clinical practice. To ensure higher-quality study design and reporting, future intervention research should incorporate an intervention reporting checklist to ensure more complete descriptions for research and practice.
明确报告癌症康复干预措施对于将研究成果转化为临床实践至关重要。本研究旨在调查针对残疾的癌症康复干预措施的干预报告的完整性，并确定最常遗漏的要素。这是对两项系统评价中包含的随机对照试验进行的二次分析，这些系统评价旨在检查针对癌症相关残疾的癌症康复干预措施的有效性，包括功能结局。使用医疗保健中复杂干预措施的制定和评估标准（Criteria for Reporting the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions in Healthcare 2）检查表对癌症康复干预措施的干预报告严谨性进行了审查。癌症康复干预措施的干预描述通常不完整。大约 85%（n=157）的试验描述了≤50%的医疗保健中复杂干预措施的制定和评估标准（Criteria for Reporting the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions in Healthcare 2）检查表项目。常见的未报告项目包括干预措施潜在理论基础的描述、保真度、对影响干预实施的过程评估或外部条件的描述、以及干预实施所需的成本或资源。研究结果表明，该文献中癌症康复干预描述缺乏必要的细节。描述不佳限制了研究向临床实践的转化。为了确保更高质量的研究设计和报告，未来的干预研究应采用干预报告检查表，以确保对研究和实践进行更完整的描述。
