Ataman Rebecca, Alhasani Rehab, Auneau-Enjalbert Line, Quigley Adria, Michael Henry Ukachukwu, Ahmed Sara
School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation of Greater Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Syst Rev. 2025 Jan 21;14(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02722-x.
Traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury impact all areas of individuals' quality of life. A synthesis of available evidence for the Traumatic Brain Injury Quality of Life (TBI-QoL) and Spinal Cord Injury Quality of Life (SCI-QoL) measurement systems could inform evidence-based clinical practice and research. Thus, we aimed to systematically review the literature of existing evidence on the measurement properties of SCI-QoL and TBI-QoL among rehabilitation populations.
We used the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) framework for evaluating measures to guide this systematic review. We searched nine electronic databases and registries, and hand-searched reference lists of included articles. Two independent reviewers screened selected articles and extracted the data. We used COSMIN's thresholds to synthesize measurement properties evidence (insufficient, sufficient), and the modified GRADE approach to synthesize evidence quality (very-low, low, moderate, high).
We included 16 studies for SCI-QoL and 14 studies for TBI-QoL. Both measurement systems have sufficient content validity, structural validity, internal consistency and construct validity across nearly all domains (GRADE: high). Most SCI-QoL domains and some TBI-QoL domains have sufficient evidence of cross-cultural validity and test-retest reliability (GRADE: moderate-high). Besides the cognition domains of TBI-QoL, which have indeterminate evidence for measurement error and sufficient evidence for responsiveness (GRADE: high), there is no additional evidence available for these measurement properties.
Rehabilitation researchers and clinicians can use SCI-QoL and TBI-QoL to describe and evaluate patients. Further evidence of measurement error, responsiveness, and predictive validity would advance the use and interpretation of SCI-QoL and TBI-QoL in rehabilitation.
创伤性脑损伤和脊髓损伤会影响个体生活质量的各个方面。对创伤性脑损伤生活质量(TBI-QoL)和脊髓损伤生活质量(SCI-QoL)测量系统的现有证据进行综合分析,可为循证临床实践和研究提供参考。因此,我们旨在系统回顾康复人群中关于SCI-QoL和TBI-QoL测量特性的现有证据文献。
我们使用基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)框架来评估测量方法,以指导本次系统回顾。我们检索了九个电子数据库和登记处,并手动检索了纳入文章的参考文献列表。两名独立的评审员筛选了选定的文章并提取了数据。我们使用COSMIN的阈值来综合测量特性证据(不足、充分),并使用改良的GRADE方法来综合证据质量(极低、低、中、高)。
我们纳入了16项关于SCI-QoL的研究和14项关于TBI-QoL的研究。两种测量系统在几乎所有领域都具有充分的内容效度、结构效度、内部一致性和构想效度(GRADE:高)。大多数SCI-QoL领域和一些TBI-QoL领域具有充分的跨文化效度和重测信度证据(GRADE:中-高)。除了TBI-QoL的认知领域,其测量误差证据不确定但反应度证据充分(GRADE:高)外,这些测量特性没有其他可用证据。
康复研究人员和临床医生可以使用SCI-QoL和TBI-QoL来描述和评估患者。测量误差、反应度和预测效度的进一步证据将推动SCI-QoL和TBI-QoL在康复中的应用和解释。