Department of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval & Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration (Cirris).
Department of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval & Researcher, Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration (Cirris), Quebec City, QC, Canada.
Clin J Pain. 2023 Dec 1;39(12):695-706. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001162.
The objective of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive overview of the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess resilience in individuals with musculoskeletal and rheumatic conditions.
Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) were searched. Studies assessing any measurement property in the target populations were included. Two reviewers independently screened all studies and assessed the risk of bias using the COSMIN checklist. Thereafter, each measurement property of each PROM was classified as sufficient, insufficient, or inconsistent based on the COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties.
Four families of PROMs [Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS); Resilience Scale (RS-18); Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10 and CD-RISC-2); and Pain Resilience Scale (PRS-14 and PRS-12)] were identified from the 9 included studies. Even if no PROM showed sufficient evidence for all measurement properties, the PRS and CD-RISC had the most properties evaluated and showed the best measurement properties, although responsiveness still needs to be assessed for both PROMs. Both PROMs showed good levels of reliability (intraclass coefficient correlation 0.61 to 0.8) and good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ≥0.70). Minimal detectable change values were 24.5% for PRS and between 4.7% and 29.8% for CD-RISC.
Although BRCS, RS-18, CD-RISC, and PRS have been used to evaluate resilience in individuals with musculoskeletal and rheumatic conditions, the current evidence only supports the use of PRS and CD-RISC in this population. Further methodological studies are therefore needed and should prioritize the assessment of reliability and responsiveness.
本系统评价的目的是全面概述用于评估肌肉骨骼和风湿性疾病患者韧性的患者报告结局测量(PROM)的测量特性。
检索了 4 个电子数据库(MEDLINE、CINAHL、PsycINFO 和 Web of Science)。纳入了评估目标人群中任何测量特性的研究。两名审查员独立筛选所有研究,并使用 COSMIN 清单评估偏倚风险。然后,根据 COSMIN 良好测量特性标准,将每个 PROM 的每个测量特性分类为充分、不充分或不一致。
从 9 项纳入的研究中确定了 4 种 PROM 家族[简短韧性应对量表(BRCS);韧性量表(RS-18);Connor-Davidson 韧性量表(CD-RISC-10 和 CD-RISC-2);和疼痛韧性量表(PRS-14 和 PRS-12)]。即使没有 PROM 显示所有测量特性的充分证据,PRS 和 CD-RISC 评估的特性最多,并且表现出最好的测量特性,尽管这两种 PROM 的反应度仍需要进行评估。两种 PROM 的可靠性(组内相关系数相关性 0.61 至 0.8)和内部一致性(Cronbach's alpha ≥0.70)均较好。PRS 的最小可检测变化值为 24.5%,CD-RISC 的最小可检测变化值在 4.7%至 29.8%之间。
尽管 BRCS、RS-18、CD-RISC 和 PRS 已用于评估肌肉骨骼和风湿性疾病患者的韧性,但目前的证据仅支持在该人群中使用 PRS 和 CD-RISC。因此,需要进一步进行方法学研究,并且应优先评估可靠性和反应度。