Al Wattar Bassel H, Schofield Sophie, Minns Victoria, Khan Khalid S
Clinical Trials Unit, Faculty of Health Medicine and Social Care, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, UK; Beginnings Assisted Conception Unit, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals, London, UK.
Beginnings Assisted Conception Unit, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals, London, UK.
Sex Reprod Healthc. 2025 Jun;44:101102. doi: 10.1016/j.srhc.2025.101102. Epub 2025 Apr 29.
Accurate and reliable heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) specific quality of life (QoL) tools can offer a holistic assessment of HMB impact and response to treatment. We systematically reviewed published disease-specific QoL assessment tools for HBM to assess their methodological quality.
We searched PubMed and EMBASE until March 2024 complemented by a search of PROQOLID database and reference lists for studies reporting on the development or validation of HMB specific QoL instruments for adult women. We assessed them against the COSMIN checklist. We scored tools for their methodological quality to make recommendations for use in practice.
We identified 2621 citations and included 17 studies reporting on the development and validation of 10 HMB specific QoL tools. All the studies were conducted in the USA and western Europe, and all were available in the English language except one. Three tools were in digital format, while seven were in paper format (7/10, 70 %). The median of QoL tool items was 21 (range 3-72) with a recall period of 1-3 months in 7/10 (70 %) tools. The overall quality was low to medium and none of the tools met all the COSMIN requirements to be recommended in clinical practice. The UFS-QOL and SAMANTA tools showed high quality for validity, responsiveness and interpretability but require further validation.
None of the available QoL tools for HMB are appropriate for use in practice. There is a need to invest in developing and validating reliable tools that offer high quality qualitative and quantitative assessment.
准确可靠的月经过多(HMB)特定生活质量(QoL)工具能够全面评估HMB的影响及对治疗的反应。我们系统回顾了已发表的针对HBM的特定疾病QoL评估工具,以评估其方法学质量。
我们检索了PubMed和EMBASE直至2024年3月,并辅以对PROQOLID数据库的检索以及对报告成年女性HMB特定QoL工具开发或验证的研究的参考文献列表的检索。我们根据COSMIN清单对它们进行评估。我们对工具的方法学质量进行评分,以便为实践应用提供建议。
我们识别出2621条引文,并纳入了17项报告10种HMB特定QoL工具开发和验证情况的研究。所有研究均在美国和西欧进行,除一项外均为英文。三种工具为数字格式,七种为纸质格式(7/10,70%)。QoL工具项目的中位数为21(范围3 - 72),7/10(70%)的工具回顾期为1 - 3个月。总体质量为低到中等,没有一种工具满足COSMIN的所有要求而可在临床实践中推荐使用。UFS - QOL和SAMANTA工具在有效性、反应性和可解释性方面显示出高质量,但需要进一步验证。
现有的用于HMB的QoL工具均不适用于实践。有必要投入资源开发和验证能够提供高质量定性和定量评估的可靠工具。