Construct Validity and Responsiveness of the Abdominal Surgery Impact Scale in the Context of Recovery After Colorectal Surgery

Quality of life instruments in acute and chronic pancreatitis: a consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) approach

BACKGROUND

Pancreatitis is a common surgical emergency, associated with pain and poor quality of life for patients. However, assessment of patient-reported outcome measures in these patients is unclear. This study aimed to identify and evaluate the methodological quality of the health-related quality of life instruments used for patients with acute or chronic pancreatitis.

METHODS

Prospective studies that evaluated health-related quality of life in acute or chronic pancreatitis were identified from systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science until 28th June 2023 (PROSPERO: CRD42021274743). Instrument characteristics were extracted, and methodological quality assessed using COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) guidelines and GRADE approach. Narrative synthesis was conducted, with recommendations for use based on COSMIN criteria, evaluated according to World Health Organisation (WHO) quality of life domains.

RESULTS

From 3850 records screened, 41 quality of life instruments were identified across 138 studies included. The majority (69.8%, n = 26) were designed to assess general health-related quality of life, whereas the remainder were abdominal-specific (n = 5) or pancreas-specific (n = 10). Only ten instruments (24.3%) demonstrated sufficient content validity, incorporating items in ≥5 WHO quality of life domains. However, only nine instruments (21.9%) incorporated public and patient involvement. Only the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index and PAN-PROMISE met the criteria to be recommended for use based on COSMIN methodological assessment.

CONCLUSION

There is significant heterogeneity in instruments used to assess quality of life after pancreatitis, with almost all instruments considered insufficient. Robust, validated, and relevant instruments are needed to better understand and determine appropriate interventions to improve quality of life for these patients.

Construct validity and responsiveness of the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) as a measure of recovery after colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Returning to preoperative levels of physical function is highly valued by patients recovering from surgery. The Duke Activity Status Index (DASI, a 12-item questionnaire) may be a simple yet robust tool to assess postoperative recovery of functional capacity. This study assessed construct validity and responsiveness of the DASI as a measure of recovery after colorectal surgery.

METHODS

Data from a trial on early mobilization after colorectal surgery were analyzed. Patients completed the DASI questionnaire preoperatively and at postoperative weeks (POW) 2 and 4. Construct validity was assessed by testing the primary a priori hypotheses that postoperative DASI scores (1) are higher in patients without vs with postoperative complications and (2) correlate with six-minute walk test distance (6MWD). Exploratory analyses assessed the association between DASI scores and (1) preoperative physical status [higher (ASA ≤ 2) vs lower (ASA > 2)], (2) stoma creation (no stoma vs stoma), (3) age [younger (≤ 75 years) vs older (> 75 years)], (4) time to readiness for discharge [shorter (≤ 4 days) vs longer (> 4 days)], and (5) surgical approach (laparoscopic vs open). Responsiveness was assessed by testing a priori hypotheses that DASI scores are higher (1) preoperatively vs at POW2 and (2) at POW4 vs POW2. Mean differences in DASI scores were obtained using linear regression. The association between DASI and 6MWD was assessed via Pearson correlation.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 100 patients undergoing colorectal surgery (mean age 65; 57% male; 81% laparoscopic). Mean DASI scores were 47.9 ± 12.1 preoperatively, 22.4 ± 12.7 at POW2, and 33.2 ± 15.7 at POW4. The data supported our two primary construct validity hypotheses, as well as 3/5 exploratory hypotheses. Both responsiveness hypotheses were supported.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support that the DASI questionnaire can be a useful tool to assess postoperative recovery of functional capacity in research and clinical practice.

Proposal and Validation of a New Classification of Surgical Outcomes after Colorectal Resections within an Enhanced Recovery Programme

Background

Advantages of Enhanced Recovery (ER) programmes in colorectal surgery have already been demonstrated, but heterogeneity exists with respect to the choice of compared outcomes. A comprehensive classification aimed at standardizing the reporting of surgical outcomes has been proposed and validated.

Method

Clinical variables of 231 patients who underwent colorectal resections within an ER programme from 2013–2018 were analysed. Their outcomes have been reported according to a new classification in 5 classes and 11 subclasses. Prognostic variables have been identified.

Results

Seventy-nine patients (34.2%) had an optimal class 1 outcome. Almost half of the patients had an uneventful recovery after being discharged after day 4 (2a). Only two patients (0.9%) were discharged early and then readmitted for a minor ailment (2b). Total morbidity was 12.6% (3a–5). Perioperative mortality was 2.6% (5). Young age, laparoscopic resection, and years of experience with ER have been identified as independent prognostic factors towards a totally positive outcome.

Conclusions

The proposed outcome classification is a simple and objective tool to report the surgical outcome in clinical studies. Its implementation seems to be appropriate, in particular, in the field of ER protocols in colorectal surgery, but it can have a wider application in any other surgical subspeciality.