Evaluation of the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale (FIQL) using item response theory reveals limitations and suggests revisions

An examination of rectal prolapse surgery patients' quality of life and symptoms using patient-reported outcome instruments: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

We measured changes in self-reported health and symptoms attributable to rectal prolapse surgery using patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures.

METHODS

A prospectively recruited cohort of patients scheduled for rectal prolapse repair in Vancouver, Canada between 2013 and 2021 were surveyed before and 6-months after surgery using seven PROs: the EuroQol Five-Dimension Instrument (EQ-5D-5L), Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7), Pain Intensity, Interference with Enjoyment of Life and General Activity (PEG), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI), Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI), and the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale (FIQL).

RESULTS

We included 46 participants who reported improvements in health status (EQ-5D-5L; p ​< ​0.01), pain interference (PEG; p ​< ​0.01), depressive symptoms (PHQ-9; p ​= ​0.01), fecal incontinence severity (FISI; p ​< ​0.01), gastrointestinal quality of life (GIQLI; p ​< ​0.01), and fecal incontinence quality of life (FIQL) related to lifestyle (p ​= ​0.02), coping and behaviour (p ​= ​0.02) and depression and self-perception (p ​= ​0.01).

CONCLUSION

Surgical repair of rectal prolapse improved patients' quality of life with meaningful improvements in fecal incontinence severity and pain, and symptom interference with daily activities.

Revised Chinese resident health literacy scale for the older adults in China: simplified version and initial validity testing

Objective

This study aimed to develop a short version of the Chinese Resident Health Literacy Scale focused on older adults in China, and further assess the reliability and validity of this short version.

Methods

The data was from a cross-sectional community-based older adults health survey conducted in 2020. The total of 5,829 older adults were randomly divided into two parts using for the simplification and assessment of the scale, respectively. Item Response Theory (IRT) and Differential Item Functioning (DIF) were used for item analysis and scale simplification. Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega were used to assess the reliability and three factors Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to assess the validity, which were compared to the original version. Moreover, Multi-group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MCFA) was used to test the model invariance of the short version across groups of gender, age groups, level of education, and cognitive status.

Results

The simplified version consisted of 27 items taken from 50 original items, of them 11 items from the dimension of knowledge and attitudes, 9 items from the dimension of behavior and lifestyle, and 7 items from the dimension of health-related skills. The overall Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega were both 0.87 (95%CI: 0.86-0.88). The goodness-of-fits of CFA in simplified version were still acceptable in CFI, TLI, GFI, and RMSEA, even improved in CFI, TLI, and GFI compared to those of original version. Also, the model was stable and invariant in MCFA across gender, cognitive status, and educational level groups.

Conclusion

In this study, we formed a simplified instrument for measuring health literacy focused on older adults in China. This short version might be more suitable for the priority recommendation in extended tracking of the dynamic changes on the levels of health literacy in the whole life cycle in public health settings. Further research might be to identify the cut-off values to distinguish the older adults with different levels of health literacy.

Clinical effectiveness and safety of self-expandable implantable bulking agents for faecal incontinence: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate whether self-expandable implantable vs non-self-expandable injectable bulking agents (second-line therapies) are equal/superior in terms of effectiveness (severity, quality of life [QoL]) and safety (adverse events) for faecal incontinence (FI).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted, and five databases were searched (Medline via Ovid, Embase, Cochrane Library, University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and International Network of Agencies for Health Technology database). In-/exclusion criteria were predefined according to the PICOS scheme. The Institute of Health Economics risk of bias (RoB) tool assessed studies' internal validity. According to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, the strength of evidence for safety outcomes was rated. A qualitative synthesis of the evidence was used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

The evidence consists of eight prospective single-arm, before-after studies (166 patients) fulfilling the inclusion criteria for assessing clinical effectiveness and safety of implantable bulking agents. FI severity statistically significantly improved in five of seven studies rated by the Cleveland Clinic FI Score and in three of five studies measured by the Vaizey score. Statistically significant improved disease-related QoL was found in one of five studies measured by the FI QoL Score and in one of two studies rated by the American Medical Systems score. Procedure-related adverse events occurred in 16 of 166 patients (i.e., intraoperative complications, anal discomfort and pain). Device-related adverse events occurred in 48 of 166 patients, including prostheses' dislodgement and removed/extruded prostheses. Studies were judged with moderate/high RoB. The strength of evidence for safety was judged to be very low.

CONCLUSION

Implantable bulking agents might be an effective and safe minimally invasive option in FI treatment if conservative therapies fail. FI severity significantly improved, however, effects on QoL need to be explored in further studies. Due to the uncontrolled nature of the case series, comparative studies need to be awaited.

A systematic review of English language patient-reported outcome measures for use in urogynaecology and female pelvic medicine

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used in clinical practice and research in urogynaecology. There is no consensus on which PROMs should be used. No unifying document identifies all available PROMs and compares the psychometric properties of these.

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature following PRISMA guidelines. Studies where women had been administered an English-language PROM which assessed pelvic-floor symptomatology and psychometric properties had been reported were included.

RESULTS

85 PROMs assessing pelvic-floor symptoms in a urogynaecology population were identified. 43 PROMs assessed lower urinary tract symptoms in 95 studies, four PROMS assessed vaginal symptoms in seven studies, 20 PROMs assessed bowel symptoms in 27 studies and three PROMs assessed sexual symptoms in seven studies. 15 PROMs assessed two or more of these symptom areas in 60 studies. PROMs with the with the best available psychometric evidence within these five areas were (urinary symptoms) the Incontinence Quality-of-Life questionnaire (I-QOL aka ICIQ-UIqol) and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ-UI-SF), (bowel symptoms) the Accidental Bowel Leakage Evaluation (ABLE) questionnaire and the International Consultation on Incontinence Bowel questionnaire (ICIQ-B), (vaginal symptoms) the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POPSS), (sexual symptoms) the Pelvic organ prolapse- urinary Incontinence Sexual function Questionnaire- IUGA revised (PISQ-IR) and (comprehensive PROMs) the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire and the Electronic Personal Assessment Questionnaire-Pelvic-Floor (ePAQ-PF).

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple PROMs with robust psychometric properties are available. Some widely used PROMs have weak evidence. Formal recommendations on which English-language PROMs to use within clinical practice and research in urogynaecology are required.

Health and quality of life among a cohort of patients having lateral internal sphincterotomy for anal fissures

AIM

The aim of this study is to report changes in health-related quality of life attributable to lateral internal sphincterotomy for treatment of anal fissure. There is very little evidence on whether the overall health-related quality of life of patients is detrimentally affected by the condition, or which aspects of self-perceived health status improve after lateral internal sphincterotomy. This study will articulate which aspects of health tend to improve and guide postoperative expectations appropriately. Knowledge gained from this study may also identify gaps in an individual patient's episode of care.

METHOD

Patients were prospectively identified when they consented to surgical treatment of their anal fissure and were contacted by phone to participate. Participants completed a number of patient-reported outcomes preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively. Faecal incontinence-related quality of life, pain and depression were measured at both time points. The severity of faecal incontinence was measured at both times.

RESULTS

Participants reported high levels of pain preoperatively. Postoperatively, improvement in pain exceeded the threshold of clinical relevance (P < 0.01). Thirty-five per cent of participants reported significant effects of faecal incontinence preoperatively, while 26% did so postoperatively. Participants with multiple comorbidities were more likely to report faecal incontinence postoperatively than preoperatively.

CONCLUSION

This study reports that lateral internal sphincterotomy improved pain symptoms without adverse effects on continence. Not all domains of health-related quality of life were similarly positively affected by anal fissure repair.

Single vs. double purse-string anastomosis during laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection (SINGLE-DOUBLE trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

An inappropriate anastomosis method during laparoscopic anterior rectal resection can increase the risk of anastomotic complications and affect surgical, economic, and oncological outcomes. The aim of this study is to compare the incidence of anastomotic complications and the surgical, economic, and oncological outcomes following single versus double purse-string anastomosis during laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for low rectal cancer.

Methods/design

This randomized controlled trial (the SINGLE–DOUBLE study) will randomly assign middle and low rectal adenocarcinoma patients to receive either single or double purse-string anastomosis during laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection. Patients will be eligible for inclusion only if they (1) have adenocarcinoma confirmed by preoperative colonoscopy and biopsy, (2) have a tumor situated less than 12 cm from the anal verge, (3) do not have the anal sphincter involved, and (4) do not have distant metastases. The primary endpoint measure will be the incidence of anastomotic complications (leakage, narrowing, and bleeding). The secondary endpoints will be surgical, economic, and oncological outcomes. A total of 500 patients will be enrolled in the study. Sample size calculation was based on previous reports and our retrospective analysis.

Discussion

This randomized single-center controlled trial is expected to demonstrate which anastomosis method (single or double purse-string anastomosis) is better for reducing complications and improving prognosis in rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic TME for low or middle rectal cancer.

Trial registration

Registration number: ChiCTR1800016116. Protocol Registration Receipt: May 13, 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3411-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.