Translation and preliminary validation of the English version of the DUX questionnaire for lower extremity bone tumor patients (Bt-DUX): a disease-specific measure for quality of life

Health-related quality of life in patients with extremity bone sarcoma after surgical treatment: a systematic review

PURPOSE

We conducted a systematic review of studies reporting on measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), with a special focus on the use of the preference-weighted instruments, in patients with extremity bone sarcoma treated with limb-salvage surgery or amputation.

METHODS

We searched MedLine, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science for English-language studies reporting on HRQoL of patients with bone sarcoma from inception to 28 August 2023. All records found were independently reviewed by two reviewers. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the CONSORT 2010 checklist to assess the quality of the cohort and randomised studies, respectively.

RESULTS

The search identified 1225 records, of which 16 studies were included for data extraction. Only one study used a preference-weighted instrument for measuring HRQoL in a small sample of patients (n = 28). Ten studies used the generic SF-36 questionnaire, but no preference-weighted HRQoL based on SF-6D was derived from the SF-36 scores. Most studies comparing HRQoL between amputation and limb-salvage surgery reported no significant differences. Twelve cohort studies scored six or more out of nine points based on the NOS. The only randomised study scored 54% on the CONSORT 2010 checklist.

CONCLUSIONS

The approaches used to measure HRQoL were inconsistent and outcome scores varied substantially. Only one study used preference-weighted instruments for HRQoL measurement. Future research into the surgical treatment of extremity bone sarcoma should consider the use of preference-weighted instruments to measure HRQoL, which will therefore enable economic evaluation for the growing orthopaedic armamentarium of novel surgical interventions.

REGISTRATION

This systematic review was registered with the PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42021282380).

Effectiveness of a crossover prosthetic foot in active children with a congenital lower limb deficiency: an explorative study

BACKGROUND

Children with lower limb prostheses cannot always keep up with their peers during active play. A pediatric crossover foot may be a promising prosthetic alternative for children engaging in high-intensity movements necessary for active play.

OBJECTIVES

To compare children's walking performance, running performance, experienced competence, and cosmesis using their prescribed prosthesis compared with the crossover foot.

STUDY DESIGN

Pretest-posttest study.

METHODS

Children with lower limb amputation or deficiency were recruited. Measurements were taken at baseline with the prescribed prosthesis and 6 weeks later with the crossover foot. Walking speed, energy cost of walking, anaerobic muscle power, stair climbing speed, ankle power, and cosmesis were evaluated.

RESULTS

Four children participated in the study. Two children had increased walking speed with the same energy cost, one child had decreased speed with increased energy cost, and one child had the same speed with decreased energy cost. Muscle power increased for three of the four children and ankle power increased for all children while using the crossover foot compared to the prescribed prosthesis. Two children reported knee pain or feeling excessive knee flexion when running with the crossover foot. One child reported negative feelings toward cosmesis of the crossover foot.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests crossover foot may benefit active children by improving walking and running performance, and decreasing energy cost. However, knee pain reports or negative feelings toward the atypical design suggest the crossover foot may not be ideal for every child. Further research is needed to determine which pediatric users would benefit from this type of prosthetic foot.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Children with lower limb deficiencies are active prosthetic users who often switch between low- and high-intensity movements in their daily activities. Therefore, they might benefit from a crossover prosthetic design. The preliminary findings of this study suggest the crossover foot (XF) may be a promising foot for active children.

Cross-Cultural Validation of the Italian Version of the Bt-DUX: A Subjective Measure of Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients Who Underwent Surgery for Lower Extremity Malignant Bone Tumour

The purpose of this study was to translate the English bone tumour DUX (Bt-DUX-Eng) questionnaire for lower extremity bone tumour patients, a disease-specific quality of life (QoL) instrument, into Italian and then examine the validity of the Italian version of Bt-DUX (Bt-DUX-It). The adaptation and translation process included forward translation, back-translation, and a review of the back-translation by an expert committee. The Bt-DUX-It was validated in a sample of adolescents treated for lower extremity osteosarcoma in Italy. Assessments included the Bt-DUX, the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS), and the European Organization for Research and Treatment Core Quality of Life Questionnaire of Cancer Patients (EORTC QLQ-C30). Fifty-one patients with a median age of 20 years (range: 15-25) completed the questionnaires. The mean Bt-DUX score was 70 (range: 16.30-100). The internal consistency of the overall score and that of the Bt-DUX-It was good: Cronbach's α was 0.95. Spearman's correlation coefficient between the Bt-DUX (total and domain scores) and EORTC QLQ C30 and TESS were overall moderate to good, reaching a p-value <0.01 in all cases. The Bt-DUX-It version is a useful tool for measuring QoL in patients with bone tumour and has similar internal consistency, construct validity, and discrimination as those of the Dutch and English versions.

Measuring outcomes following tibial fracture

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine how outcome is measured following adult tibial fracture in the modern era of functional outcome measurement and patient reported outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of publications since 2009 was performed, looking specifically at acute, adult tibial shaft fractures. Ovid Medline, Embase, PubMed and PsycINFO databases were searched for relevant titles which were then screened by two authors with adjudication where necessary by a third. Relevant articles were reviewed in full and data was extracted concerning the study participants, study design and any measures that were used to quantify the results following fracture. The results were collated and patient reported outcome measures were assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) standards.

RESULTS

A total of 943 titles and articles were reviewed, with 117 included for full analysis. A wide range of clinical and radiological "outcomes" were described, along with named clinician- and patient-reported outcome measures. There was considerable heterogeneity and lack of detail in the description of the simplest outcomes, such as union, infection or reoperation. Reported clinician and patient reported outcome measures are variably used. None of the identified patient reported outcome measures have been validated for use following tibial fracture.

CONCLUSION

We recommend definition of a core outcome set for use following tibial fracture. This will standardise outcome reporting following these injuries. Furthermore, there is need for a validated patient reported outcome measure to better assess patient important outcomes in this patient group.