Evaluating patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for bladder cancer: a systematic review using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist

A systematic review of the patient reported outcomes that affect patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer after radical cystectomy and urinary diversion

Objectives

To determine the functional domains and symptom scales that affect patients most following radical cystectomy (RC) and urinary diversion (UD), and if a single instrument (or combination) adequately captures these bothersome symptoms. It is unclear whether current patient reported outcome (PRO) instruments that have been used to assess quality of life in patients following RC and UD adequately cover the most bothersome symptoms affecting patients.

Materials and methods

A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cinahl and Cochrane was conducted from January 2000 to May 2023 for original articles of patients who had RC and UD since 2000 for muscle invasive bladder cancer. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) process was followed. Extracted data included the PRO measures used, domains reported and scores in the first 12 months post-surgery (short-term) and after 12 months (long-term). A conservative threshold of <70 for functional domains and >30 for symptom domains was used to determine which PRO domains were potentially concerning to patients in each study. Quality assessment was performed using the QUALSYST appraisal tool.

Results

Thirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria, including a total of eight unique PRO instruments. The main findings indicated that physical function was the most concerning PRO for patients with both neobladder (NB) and ileal conduit (IC) in the short and long term. Additionally, bowel, urinary and sexual bother were concerning symptoms for patients with NB in the long-term, but only in the short-term for those with IC.

Conclusions

The main issues are adequately addressed using the combination of EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BLM30 instruments.

Patient-centeredness and psychometric properties of the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale 2.0 (DVPRS)

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the patient-centeredness and psychometric properties of the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale 2.0 (DVPRS) as a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for pain assessment in a military population.

DESIGN

A critical evaluation of the DVPRS was conducted, considering its fit-for-purpose as a PROM and its patient-centeredness using the National Health Council's Rubric to Capture the Patient Voice.

SETTING

The study focused on the use of the DVPRS within the Department of Defense (DoD) and Veterans Health Administration (VA) healthcare settings.

SUBJECTS

The DVPRS was evaluated based on published studies and information provided by measure developers. The assessment included content validity, reliability, construct validity, and ability to detect change. Patient-centeredness and patient engagement were assessed across multiple domains.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers assessed the DVPRS using a tool/checklist/questionnaire, and any rating discrepancies were resolved through consensus. The assessment included an evaluation of psychometric properties and patient-centeredness based on established criteria.

RESULTS

The DVPRS lacked sufficient evidence of content validity, with no patient involvement in its development. Construct validity was not assessed adequately, and confirmatory factor analysis was not performed. Patient-centeredness and patient engagement were also limited, with only a few domains showing meaningful evidence of patient partnership.

CONCLUSIONS

The DVPRS as a PROM for pain assessment in the military population falls short in terms of content validity, construct validity, and patient-centeredness. It requires further development and validation, including meaningful patient engagement, to meet current standards and best practices for PROMs.

Evaluating the Psychometric Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Assessing Symptoms in Hemodialysis: A Systematic Review Using COSMIN Guidelines

CONTEXT

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may have an important role in screening and monitoring for unpleasant symptoms in kidney failure. However, there is still little evidence on the psychometric properties of the measures available to assess physical and psychological symptoms in people on hemodialysis. This gap makes it difficult to decide which measure is the most appropriate for use in clinical practice and research with this population.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to critically appraise, compare, and summarize the quality of the measurement properties of PROMs used to assess symptoms in adults on hemodialysis.

METHODS

The protocol for this review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023393441). The last database search update was performed on November 25, 2022. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines informed methodological quality assessment, data extraction, analysis, and synthesis.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven primary studies reported the measurement properties of 16 PROMs used to assess physical and psychological symptoms in adults on hemodialysis. Results showed that most measures lacked the necessary psychometric evidence to attest their suitability for this study population, and few underwent rigorous validation procedures. Overall, caveats were found on methodological quality and evidence of content validity and structural validity, and little data was available on responsiveness, measurement error, and cross-cultural validity.

CONCLUSION

The current systematic review provides the basis for identifying PROMs with potential utility for assessing symptoms in hemodialysis care. Several recommendations are presented to help guide future research aimed at improving the rigor of validation and/or translation procedures of existing (and future) measures using COSMIN guidelines.

Exploring the psychometric properties of self-report instruments used to measure health-related quality of life and subjective wellbeing of adolescents with intellectual disabilities: A Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) systematic review

BACKGROUND

Studies that have systematically reviewed the psychometric properties of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and subjective wellbeing instruments for adolescents with intellectual disabilities narrowly focus on disease or health-specific conditions. This review aimed to critically appraise the psychometric properties of self-report instruments used to measure HRQoL and subjective wellbeing of adolescents with intellectual disabilities.

METHOD

A systematic search was undertaken in four databases. The quality of the included studies and their psychometric properties was assessed according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments Risk of Bias checklist.

RESULTS

Seven studies reported psychometric properties of five different instruments. Only one instrument identified as having potential to be recommended for use but requires further validation research to assess its quality for this population.

CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support the recommendation of a self-report instrument to assess HRQoL and subjective wellbeing of adolescents with intellectual disabilities.

Assessing the quality of patient-reported outcome measurements for gynecological cancers: a systematic review

Purpose: To provide perspective on patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) instruments to adopt in patients diagnosed with gynecological cancers. Methods: A systematic search was conducted to identify PROMs developed for or applied in gynecological cancer populations. PROMs identified in more than one study subsequently underwent assessment according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria. Results: Overall, 55 PROMs were identified within the gynecological cancer setting, and 20 were assessed according to COSMIN guidelines. Most PROMs had limited information reported, but a best fit approach was adopted to recommend a number of instruments for use in patients with gynecological cancer. Conclusion: Further study to assess the methodological quality of each PROM utilized in gynecological cancers is warranted to endorse the recommendations of this review.

Seizure severity assessment tools for adult epilepsy patients: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Seizure outcomes from antiseizure medication (ASM) therapy can be measured across various domains using assessment tools. The available tools may contain an array of different components or items. Seizure severity assessment, as opposed to seizure frequency count may have been a more accurate measurement in determining the effectiveness of ASM therapy. This study aimed to review studies developing seizure severity assessment tools for adults with epilepsy, describe the development methods and validation, and compare the list of items in these tools.

METHODS

The systematic search utilized established databases such as Scopus, Ovid, Web of Science, Medline, Wiley Online, and Cochrane Library. Studies published from inception to December 15, 2022, were selected. Publications describing the development of tools to measure seizure severity among adult epilepsy patients were included. Outcome measures including the tool's content, development methods, validity, and reliability assessments were compared.

RESULTS

The search produced eight publications describing the development of eight seizure severity assessment tools. One of these tools is part of a multidimensional assessment of the overall impact of epilepsy. The frequently used method in the initial development was the qualitative method (n = 6) where two publications reanalyzed the items from previous studies. Face validity was the most common validation test conducted (n = 4). At least one reliability assessment was conducted for each of the tools, most commonly by the test-retest method (n = 6) and inter-rater reliability (n = 5). All of these tools cover the components of pre-ictal (warning/aura), ictal, and postictal (recovery) events.

CONCLUSION

The identified tools described the assessment of seizure severity using various subscales. The emergence of new methods in quantifying seizure severity unfolds opportunities in discovering more comprehensive assessments of seizure severity in both clinical trials and daily clinical practice.

Health-related quality of life after curative treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer

Muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is an aggressive disease for which the gold-standard treatment is radical cystectomy (RC) in combination with cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Bladder-sparing strategies such as trimodal therapy (TMT) have also emerged to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients. However, an improved understanding of the effect of all these treatment modalities on HRQoL is essential to provide personalized patient care. Different combinations of generic, cancer-specific and bladder cancer-specific questionnaires can be used as instruments for HRQoL evaluation in patients with MIBC before and after curative treatments, which can largely affect multiple domains of HRQoL including general health as well as physical, functional, social and emotional well-being. However, diagnosis of MIBC per se is also likely to affect HRQoL, and the perspective of cure after RC or TMT could induce a return to baseline HRQoL values for most of these domains. A considerable amount of data on HRQoL after RC is available, but conflicting results have been reported regarding the effect of urinary diversion (ileal conduit or orthotopic neobladder) and surgical approach (open or robotic surgery) on patient quality of life. Data on HRQoL after TMT are scarce, and additional comparative studies including patients receiving RC (especially using ileal orthotopic neobladder) are needed.

The current use of the EORTC QLQ-NMIBC24 and QLQ-BLM30 questionnaires for the assessment of health-related quality of life in bladder cancer patients: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Investigating the use of the EORTC bladder cancer (BC) modules by evaluating: (a) study contexts/designs; (b) languages/countries in which the modules were administered; (c) their acceptance by patients/investigators; and (d) their psychometric properties.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed with studies from 1998 until 20/10/2021 in five databases. Articles/conference abstracts using the EORTC-QLQBLM30 (muscle invasive BC) and the EORTC-QLQNMIBC24 (previously referred to as QLQ-BLS24; non-muscle invasive BC) were included. Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts/full-texts and performed data extraction.

RESULTS

A total of 76 eligible studies were identified. Most studies included the BLM30 (n = 53), were in a urological surgery context (n = 41) and were cross-sectional (n = 35) or prospective (n = 30) in design. The BC modules were administered in 14 languages across 19 countries. Missing data were low-moderate for all non-sex related questions (< 1% to 15%). Sex-related questions had higher rates of missing data (ranging from 6.9% to 84%). Most investigators did not use all scales of the questionnaires. One validation study for the original BLS24 led to the development of the NMIBC24, which adopted a new scale structure for which good structural validity was confirmed (n = 3). Good reliability and validity was shown for the NMIBC24 module, except for malaise and bloating/flatulence scales. Psychometric evidence for BLM30 is lacking.

CONCLUSION

These results provide insight into how the EORTC BC quality of life modules could be further improved. Current work is ongoing to update the modules and to determine if the two modules can be combined into a single questionnaire that works well in both the NMIBC and MIBC settings.

Factors Influencing Quality of Life and Functional Outcomes in Patients With Bladder Cancer

Here, we review the quality of life and functional outcomes of patients with bladder cancer after treatment and assess potential contributing factors. For current scoring systems, we highlighted the most commonly used specificity scores. In addition, we discuss the impact and bias on the quality of life of patients undergoing urinary diversion modalities, robotic surgery, perioperative rehabilitation, and bladder-preserving radiochemotherapy. Through this review, clinicians will gain better insights regarding the importance of improving patients' quality of life with the goal of restoring their patients' normal function and participating in social activities.

Validation and reliability of the Dutch version of the EORTC QLQ-BLM30 module for assessing the health-related quality of life of patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

Quality of Life (QoL) of bladder cancer patients has been largely neglected. This is partly due to the lack of well-validated QoL questionnaires. The aim of this study is to examine the structural validity, reliability (i.e., internal consistency and test-retest reliability), construct validity (i.e., divergent validity and known group validity) and responsiveness of the Dutch version of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL questionnaire for muscle invasive bladder cancer (EORTC-QLQ-BLM30).

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) participating in the population-based 'Blaaskankerzorg In Beeld' (BlaZIB) study who completed the EORTC-QLQ-BLM30 at baseline were included. BlaZIB is a Dutch nationwide population-based prospective cohort study collecting clinical data and QoL data of bladder cancer patients. QoL is assessed with a self-administered questionnaire at four points in time: 6 weeks (baseline), 6 months, 12 months and 24 months after diagnosis. Confirmatory factor analysis and multitrait scaling analysis were used to investigate and adapt the scale structure. Reliability, construct validity and responsiveness of the revised scales were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 1542 patients invited to participate, 650 patients (42.2%) completed the QLQ-BLM30 at baseline. The questionnaire's scale structure was revised into seven scales and eight single items. Internal consistency and test-reliability were adequate for most scales (Cronbach's α ≥0.70 and intraclass correlation coefficient ≥ 0.70, respectively), with the exception of the revised urostomy problem scale and abdominal bloating and flatulence scale. The questionnaire exhibited little overlap with the EORTC-QLQ-C30: all correlations were < 0.40, except for the correlation between emotional function (QLQ-C30) and future worries (QLQ-BLM30). The questionnaire was able to distinguish between patient subgroups formed on the basis of physical function, but not - as hypothesized- based on stage. Changes in health due to treatment were captured by the questionnaire, indicating that the questionnaire is responsive to change.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that the adapted scale structure of the EORTC-QLQ-BLM30 generally exhibits good measurement properties in Dutch patients, but needs to be validated in other languages and settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

BlaZIB, NL8106, www.trialregister.nl.

Development of a specific supportive care needs scale for radical cystectomy patients and its reliability and validity test

OBJECTIVE

To develop a specific supportive care needs scale for patients who have undergone radical cystectomy, and to assess its reliability and validity.

METHODS

The clinical test version of the scale was developed based on literature review, qualitative interviews, Delphi method, and a pretest. The reliability and validity of the scale were assessed in a cohort of 603 patients who had undergone radical cystectomy at 5 Grade A hospitals in Chongqing, China.

RESULTS

The final scale included 26 items across the following 7 dimensions: health information needs, social needs, family support needs, physiological needs, sexual needs, daily activities needs, and psychological needs. The content validity index was 0.991 and the content validity indices of each item ranged from 0.889 to 1.00. Seven factors were extracted by exploratory factor analysis and the cumulative contribution of variance accounted for 70.762%. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a good fit of the model (X²/df = 1.595, GFI = 0.904, IFI = 0.943, TLI = 0.932, CFI = 0.942, RMSEA = 0.044, and RMR = 0.026). The Cronbach's ɑ coefficient and retest reliability were 0.807 and 0.810, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The specific supportive care needs scale for radical cystectomy patients developed in this study showed the good reliability and validity. The tool can be invaluable for comprehensive assessment of the specific supportive care needs of these patients.

Early vs. standard reversal ileostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Formation of a defunctioning loop ileostomy is common after mid and low rectal resection. Historically, they were reversed between 3 and 6 months after initial resection. Recently, earlier closure (< 14 days) has been suggested by some current randomised controlled trials. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of early stoma closure on surgical and patient outcomes.

Methods

A systematic review of the current randomised controlled trial literature comparing early and standard ileostomy closure after rectal surgery was performed. Specifically, we examined surgical outcomes including; morbidity, mortality and quality of life.

Results

Six studies met the predefined criteria and were included in our analysis. 275 patients underwent early stoma closure compared with 259 patients having standard closure. Overall morbidity was similar between both groups (25.5% vs. 21.6%) (OR, 1.47; 95% CI 0.75–2.87). However, there tended to be more reoperations (8.4 vs. 4.2%) (OR, 2.02, 95% CI 0.99–4.14) and small bowel obstructions/postoperative ileus (9.3% vs. 4.4%) (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22–0.90) in the early closure group, but no difference across the other domains.

Conclusions

Early closure appears to be a feasible in highly selective cases after good perioperative counselling and shared decision-making. Further research on quality of life outcomes and long term benefits is necessary to help define which patients are suitable candidates for early closure.

Protocol for a systematic review exploring the psychometric properties of self-report health-related quality of life and subjective wellbeing measures used by adolescents with intellectual disabilities

BACKGROUND

Whilst there are studies that have systematically reviewed the psychometric properties of quality of life measures for children and young people with intellectual disabilities, these narrowly focus on disease or health conditions. The objective of this planned systematic review is therefore to collate, summarise, and critically appraise the psychometric properties of self-report health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and subjective wellbeing measures used by adolescents (aged 11-16) with an intellectual disability.

METHODS

We designed and registered a study protocol for a systematic review of studies which explores the psychometric properties of self-report HRQoL and subjective wellbeing measures used by adolescents with intellectual disabilities. Electronic databases including PsycINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and ERIC will be searched using predefined search terms to identify relevant studies. Quantitative and mixed-methods studies, and studies published in peer-reviewed journals or grey literature, will be included. Review papers, editorials, and case studies will be excluded. Eligible studies should identify self-report measures which assess HRQoL and subjective wellbeing among adolescents with intellectual disabilities. The methodological quality of the included studies will be assessed by applying the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. The quality of the evidence (i.e. the total body of evidence used for the overall ratings on each psychometric property of an instrument) will be evaluated in accordance with the modified GRADE guidelines.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review will be among the first to systematically explore the psychometric properties of self-report HRQoL and subjective wellbeing measures used by adolescents with intellectual disabilities. By providing evidence-based knowledge about measures being used in HRQoL and subjective wellbeing research amongst this population, and more importantly how reliable and valid these measures are, the most suitable for use will be identified. Our findings will be of potential interest to clinicians, researchers, and service providers who need information about the methodological quality and the characteristics of measures to make informed decisions about the most reliable and valid tool for a specific purpose. The findings from this study will contribute to the knowledge surrounding available and appropriate measures to use for measuring HRQoL and subjective wellbeing of adolescents with intellectual disabilities, which are necessary to inform intervention development and future health policy.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

The protocol has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The registration number is CRD42021231697 .

Contemporary Management of Locally Advanced and Recurrent Rectal Cancer: Views from the PelvEx Collaborative

Pelvic exenteration is a complex operation performed for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic cancers. The goal of surgery is to achieve clear margins, therefore identifying adjacent or involved organs, bone, muscle, nerves and/or vascular structures that may need resection. While these extensive resections are potentially curative, they can be associated with substantial morbidity. Recently, there has been a move to centralize care to specialized units, as this facilitates better multidisciplinary care input. Advancements in pelvic oncology and surgical innovation have redefined the boundaries of pelvic exenterative surgery. Combined with improved neoadjuvant therapies, advances in diagnostics, and better reconstructive techniques have provided quicker recovery and better quality of life outcomes, with improved survival This article provides highlights of the current management of advanced pelvic cancers in terms of surgical strategy and potential future developments.

Evaluation of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Positive Psychosocial Constructs in Children and Adolescent/Young Adults with Cancer: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties

Introduction: Children, adolescents, and young adults with cancer are a vulnerable population in whom improvements in psycho-oncology care would be valuable. We previously published a scoping review exploring what is known about positive psychological constructs in this population. A key finding was that evidence-based patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were needed to standardize psycho-oncology research. Methods: We undertook a systematic review of measurement properties focused on PROMs in the pediatric and adolescent/young adults (AYAs) with cancer populations. We searched for PROMs that measured at least 1 of 15 previously identified, key positive constructs. This systematic review followed COSMIN guidelines, considered the gold standard manual for systematic reviews of measurement properties. Results: We identified 20 (22 if proxy reports are counted separately) unique PROMs that met inclusion criteria. Of those, only five were recommended for use given the current evidence. The remainder may be used if no alternative exists. Only eight PROMs had any evidence of content validity, considered the most important psychometric property by COSMIN. Many studies were at risk of bias owing to incomplete or suboptimal methods. Discussion: Five PROMs are considered reliable for the pediatric and AYA with cancer populations. A number of PROMs require additional research to ensure their items and instructions are comprehensive, relevant, and comprehensible to children and AYAs. Given the overall lack of research, this review may be considered a starting point for the future refinement of a core set of PROMs to measure positive psychological constructs.

Protocol for implementation of the 'AusPROM' recommendations for elective surgery patients: a mixed-methods cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Incorporating patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) into usual care in hospitals can improve safety and quality. Gaps exist in electronic PROM (ePROM) implementation recommendations, including for elective surgery. The aims are to: (1) understand barriers and enablers to ePROM implementation in hospitals and develop Australian ePROM implementation recommendations (AusPROM); (2) test the feasibility and acceptability of the Quality of Recovery 15 item short-form (QoR-15) PROM for elective surgery patients applying the AusPROM and (3) establish if the QoR-15 PROM has concurrent validity with the EQ-5D-5L.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Phase I will identify staff barriers and facilitators for the implementation of the AusPROM recommendations using a Delphi technique. Phase II will determine QoR-15 acceptability for elective surgery patients across four pilot hospitals, using the AusPROM recommendations. For phase II, in addition to a consumer focus group, patients will complete brief acceptability surveys, incorporating the QoR-15, in the week prior to surgery, in the week following surgery and 4 weeks postsurgery. The primary endpoint will be 4 weeks postsurgery. Phase III will be the national implementation of the AusPROM (29 hospitals) and the concurrent validity of the QoR-15 and generic EQ-5D-5L. This protocol adopts the Guidelines for Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trials Protocols guidelines.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The results will be disseminated via public forums, conferences and peer-reviewed journals. Ethics approval: La Trobe University (HEC20479).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12621000298819 (Phase I and II) and ACTRN12621000969864 (Phase III).

Inter-rater Reliability of the Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association Score in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Cross-sectional Study

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cross-sectional blinded-assessor cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the inter-rater reliability of the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score in a large cohort of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) patients.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The mJOA score is widely accepted as the primary outcome measure in DCM; it has been utilized in clinical practice guidelines and directly influences treatment recommendations, but its reliability has not been established.

METHODS

A refined version of the mJOA was administered to DCM patients by two or more blinded clinicians. Inter-rater reliability was measured using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), agreement, and mean difference for mJOA total score and subscores. Data were also analyzed with analysis of variance for differences by mJOA severity (mild: 15-17, moderate: 12-14, severe: <12), assessor, assessment order, previous surgery, age, and sex.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-four DCM patients underwent 322 mJOA assessments (183 paired assessments). ICC was 0.88 for total mJOA, 0.79 for upper extremity (UE) motor, 0.84 for lower extremity (LE) motor, 0.63 for UE sensation, and 0.78 for urinary function subscores. Paired assessments were identical across all four subscores in 25%. The mean difference in mJOA was 0.93 points between assessors, and this differed by severity (mild: 0.68, moderate: 1.24, severe: 0.87, P = 0.001). Differences of ≥ 2 points occurred in 19%. Disagreement between mild and moderate severity occurred in 12% of patients. Other variables did not demonstrate significant relationships with mJOA scores.

CONCLUSION

The inter-rater reliability of total mJOA and its subscores is good, except for UE sensory function (moderate). However, the vast majority of assessments differed between observers, indicating that this measure should be interpreted carefully, particularly when near the threshold between severity categories, or when a patient is reassessed for deterioration. Further efforts to educate clinicians on administration and to refine the UE sensory subscore may enhance the reliability of this tool.Level of Evidence: 1.

Development and Validation of an Instrument to Measure Health-Related Out-of-Pocket Costs: The Cost for Patients Questionnaire

OBJECTIVE

The growth of healthcare spending is a major concern for insurers and governments but also for patients whose health problems may result in costs going beyond direct medical costs. To develop a comprehensive tool to measure direct and indirect costs of a health condition for patients and their families to various outpatient contexts.

METHODS

We conducted a content and face validation including results of a systematic review to identify the items related to direct and indirect costs for patients or their families and an online Delphi to determine the cost items to retain. We conducted a pilot test-retest with 18 naive participants and analyzed data calculating intraclass correlation and kappa coefficients.

RESULTS

An initial list of 34 items was established from the systematic review. Each round of the Delphi panel incorporated feedback from the previous round until a strong consensus was achieved. After 4 rounds of the Delphi to reach consensus on items to be included and wording, the questionnaire had a total of 32 cost items. For the test-retest, kappa coefficients ranged from -0.11 to 1.00 (median = 0.86), and intraclass correlation ranged from -0.02 to 0.99 (median = 0.62).

CONCLUSIONS

A rigorous process of content and face development was implemented for the Cost for Patients Questionnaire, and this study allowed to set a list of cost elements to be considered from the patient's perspective. Additional research including a test-retest with a larger sample will be part of a subsequent validation strategy.

A comparison of six outcome measures across the recovery period after distal radius fixation-Which to use and when?

PURPOSE

Many standardized outcome measures exist to measure recovery after surgical fixation of distal radius fractures, however, choosing the optimal instrument is difficult. We evaluated responsiveness, ceiling/floor effects, and criterion validity over multiple time intervals across a 2-year follow-up period for six commonly used instruments.

METHODS

A total of 259 patients who received open reduction and internal fixation for distal radius fractures between 2012 and 2015 were recruited. Patients were administered the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), Shortened Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH), Green and O'Brien score (Cooney modification) (CGNO), Gartland and Werley score (Sarmiento modification) (SGNW), flexion-extension arc (FEArc), and grip fraction test (GripFrac) at 1.5, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Responsiveness was evaluated by calculating standardized response means (SRM) and Cohen's d effect sizes (ES), and by correlating each instrument's change scores against those of QuickDASH and PRWE, which were also used as external comparators to assess criterion validity. Ceiling/floor effects were calculated for all measures at each time point.

RESULTS

SRM (1.5-24 months) were 1.81, 1.77, 1.43, 1.16, 2.23, 2.45 and ES (1.5-24 months) were 1.81, 1.82, 1.95, 1.31, 1.99 and 2.90 for QuickDASH, PRWE, CGNO, SGNW, FEArc, and GripFrac respectively. Spearman correlation coefficients against QuickDASH at 24 months were: 0.809, 0.248, 0.563, 0.285, and 0.318 for PRWE, CGNO, SGNW, FEArc, and GripFrac respectively. Significant (>15% of patients reaching maximum score) ceiling effects were observed before 6 months for PRWE and SGNW.

CONCLUSIONS

Our evidence supports the use of QuickDASH, PRWE, FEArc and GripFrac up to 6 months postsurgery, and QuickDASH and PRWE after 6 months.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

The development of the Cystectomy-Pathway Assessment Tool (C-PAT): a concise tool to assess the quality of care in the cystectomy pathway

OBJECTIVES

To develop and test the psychometric properties of a concise, patient-reported questionnaire, designed to assess key aspects of the radical cystectomy (RC) patient pathway that are important to both patients and clinicians.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Draft items were developed by a consultation with a 13-member expert clinical panel, and the in-depth qualitative analysis of 14 semi-structured interviews with patients who had received RC within the previous 18 months. A further nine cognitive interviews with patients refined the items and ensured they were easy to complete. Pilot testing in 122 patients recruited from five hospitals in England tested the properties of validity and reliability of the resulting 17-item questionnaire.

RESULTS

Patients and clinicians identified the following aspects as important for the delivery of quality patient care. These included timely referral and initial test results; an explanation of risk/benefits of treatment; access to a cancer nurse specialist; training and support in stoma management; timely surgery, surgical complications, and timely follow-up. Pilot testing showed missing data was low (≤3% for all items), and between 73% and 89% of the responses to items were the most positive about their care (indicating ceiling effects). Five items were identified using factor analysis as being statistically related (Cronbach's α 0.76, intraclass correlation coefficient test-retest reliability of 0.95) and formed the scored part of the tool 'care and support', scored 0-16. There was insufficient evidence at this stage to show the tool was capable of measuring differences between cancer centres.

CONCLUSION

We have developed a questionnaire that captures aspects of quality of care within the RC patient pathway. The results support the validity and reliability of the 17-item Cystectomy-Pathway Assessment Tool (C-PAT). We envisage the tool can be the basis for audit of the patient reported assessment of the quality of care for individual cancer centres.

Health-related quality of life in bladder cancer patients: bladder cancer-specific instruments and domains. Part 2

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Several instruments have been designed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with bladder cancer (BC). However, they vary in purpose, domains, and quality. To identify QoL instruments that have been validated for BC patients and to critically assess their domains and limitations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Of the 11 instruments identified, seven have been externally validated. Of these, four can be used across all disease states; two are available for QoL assessment in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC); and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) module is intended for use together with a generic cancer-specific tool. Of the three instruments available to assess QoL in patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Bladder Cancer Muscle Invasive30 (QLQ-BLM30) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bladder-Cystectomy (FACT-Bl-Cys) need to be used each with their respective generic core questionnaire, whereas Ileal Orthotopic Neobladder-Pro Questionnaire is intended only to evaluate patients who have received an orthotopic neobladder.The core domains assessed by these instruments include social functioning, mental health, physical function, urinary function and sexual function.

SUMMARY

No optimal BC-specific QoL instruments exist. Multiple cancer- and BC-specific instruments are required to cover each of the relevant domains. Selected tools should be reviewed within the context of specific research objectives.

Validated Tools to Measure Costs for Patients: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Increasing healthcare expenditures is a major concern to insurers and governments, but also to patients who must pay a greater proportion of their healthcare costs. The objective of this study was to identify validated tools for measuring the costs of a health condition for patients as well as the different elements to be considered when measuring costs from the patient's perspective.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted from 1984 to December 2020. The search strategy was applied to seven different databases that had been identified prior as pertinent sources. Two authors independently extracted and compiled data. In case of disagreement, arbitration by two other researchers was conducted. The methodological quality of the included articles was evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist.

RESULTS

Among the 679 retrieved articles, nine met the inclusion criteria. The types of costs evaluated in these studies included direct costs for patients as well as for caregivers, indirect costs, and intangible costs. The development and validation processes used in these articles included a literature search, a discussion with the involved stakeholders, the development of an initial questionnaire, the testing of the questionnaire on a sample of patients, and a critical review. Regarding the psychometric properties of the tool, only five studies tested the reliability and validity of the instrument.

CONCLUSIONS

There are very few validated tools available to measure the different health-related costs from a patient perspective. Further research is needed to develop and validate a versatile and generalizable tool using a rigorous methodological process.

A Systematic Review of Outcome Reporting, Definition and Measurement Heterogeneity in Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Effectiveness Trials of Adjuvant, Prophylactic Treatment After Transurethral Resection

BACKGROUND

Heterogenous outcome reporting in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) effectiveness trials of adjuvant treatment after transurethral resection (TURBT) has been noted in systematic reviews (SRs). This hinders comparing results across trials, combining them in meta-analyses, and evidence-based decision-making for patients and clinicians.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to systematically review the extent of reporting and definition heterogeneity.

METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified from SRs comparing adjuvant treatments after TURBT or TURBT alone in patients with NMIBC (with or without carcinoma in situ) published between 2000-2020. Abstracts and full texts were screened independently by two reviewers. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by another.

RESULTS

We screened 807 abstracts; from 15 SRs, 57 RCTs were included. Verbatim outcome names were coded to standard outcome names and organised using the Williamson and Clarke taxonomy. Recurrence (98%), progression (74%), treatment response (in CIS studies) (40%), and adverse events (77%) were frequently reported across studies. However, overall (33%) and cancer-specific (33%) survival, treatment completion (17%) and treatment change (37%) were less often reported. Quality of Life (3%) and economic outcomes (2%) were rarely reported. Heterogeneity was evident throughout, particularly in the definitions of progression and recurrence, and how CIS patients were handled in the analysis of studies with predominantly papillary patients, highlighting further issues with the definition of recurrence and progression vs treatment response for CIS patients. Data reporting was also inconsistent, with some trials reporting event rates at various time-points and others reporting time-to-event with or without Hazard Ratios. Adverse events were inconsistently reported. QoL data was absent in most trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Heterogenous outcome reporting is evident in NMIBC effectiveness trials. This has profound implications for meta-analyses, SRs and evidence-based treatment decisions. A core outcome set is required to reduce heterogeneity.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This systematic review found inconsistencies in outcome definitions and reporting, pointing out the urgent need for a core outcome set to help improve evidence-based treatment decisions.

Diabetes distress instruments in adults with Type 1 diabetes: A systematic review using the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments) checklist

AIMS

To identify all extant instruments used to measure diabetes distress in adults with Type 1 diabetes and to evaluate the evidence for the measurement properties of these instruments.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, CINAHL plus and PsycINFO were systematically searched from inception up until 12 March 2020 for all publications which evaluated the psychometric properties of diabetes distress measurement instruments. The quality of the methodology and the measurement properties in the identified studies were evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines.

RESULTS

Seven out of the 7656 articles retrieved in the search were included in the final review. Four diabetes distress measurement instruments were identified, none of which displayed evidence for all measurement properties specified in the COSMIN guidelines. The Problem Areas in Diabetes-11 (PAID-11) demonstrated the best psychometric properties, displaying strong evidence for structural validity, internal consistency, hypothesis testing, responsiveness and criterion validity. The Problem Areas in Diabetes scale (PAID) was the most frequently investigated instrument, demonstrating good relevance and hypothesis testing across four studies; however, concerns remain over its factor structure.

CONCLUSION

The PAID-11 appears to be the most psychometrically sound instrument for measuring diabetes distress in adults with Type 1 diabetes, displaying strong evidence for a range of measurement properties. However, as only one study evaluated this instrument and its content validity has yet to be assessed, further validation is warranted. Additional qualitative work is needed to assess the content validity of these instruments among individuals with Type 1 diabetes.

Setting and maintaining standards for patient-reported outcome measures: can we rely on the COSMIN checklists?

As test-developers we have often been troubled by published reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Too often minor issues are judged important while other reviews exclude the best measures available. Perhaps this led several groups to make recommendations for evaluating the quality of PROMs. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist is the latest set of recommendations. While reviewing the COSMIN literature and reviews conducted using their recommendations several concerns became apparent. The checklist is not evidence-based, relying on the opinion of researchers experienced in health-related quality of life. PROMs measuring other types of outcomes are inadequately covered by the checklist. COSMIN choose to focus on Classical Test Theory and the checklists are not appropriate for use with PROMs developed using modern measurement. Such an approach only obstructs progress in the field of outcome measurement. The retrospective nature of the evaluations also penalizes new PROMs. While the checklists imply that composite, ordinal level measurement is acceptable, crucial aspects of instrument development and quality are excluded. Reviews based on the COSMIN checklist produce contradictory conclusions and fail to provide evidence to support the recommendations. These problems suggest that the checklists themselves lack reliability and validity. It is also clear that several reviewers lack the expertise to apply the checklists. Researchers require a good grounding in instrument development and psychometrics to produce quality reviews. The science of modern PROM development is still in an early phase. Few available PROMs have sufficient quality, limiting the need for complex reviews. Standards need to be agreed for high quality outcome measurement. The issue is who should set these standards? Most published reviews merely scratch the surface and lack essential detail. All reviews of PROMs should be treated with caution, irrespective of whether the COSMIN checklist was employed.

Health-related quality of life in the randomized phase 3 study of ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel in platinum-refractory advanced urothelial carcinoma (RANGE)

BACKGROUND

To evaluate patient-reported outcomes with ramucirumab plus docetaxel, a regimen which improved progression-free survival in platinum-refractory advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC).

METHODS

RANGE-a randomized, double-blinded, phase 3 trial in patients with platinum-refractory aUC. Ramucirumab (10 mg/kg) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m2) or placebo plus docetaxel were administered every 21 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients received maximum 10 cycles of docetaxel. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EuroQoL five-dimensions (EQ-5D-5L) were administered at baseline, start of each cycle, and 30-day follow-up visit. A ≥ 10-point change in QLQ-C30 scores was considered meaningful. Rates of improved/stable scores were compared between treatment arms using Fisher's exact test. Time to deterioration (TtD) was estimated and compared using Kaplan-Meier estimation and log-rank test.

RESULTS

Of the 530 patients, ~ 97% patients in each arm provided baseline QLQ-C30 data. On-treatment compliance was ≥ 88% for first 8 cycles. Mean baseline QLQ-C30 scores were similar between arms, with global quality of life (QoL), fatigue, pain, and insomnia having greatest impairment. Postbaseline rates of improved/stable QLQ-C30 scores were similar between treatment arms except for greater improvement in pain score with ramucirumab. TtD of QLQ-C30 scales favored ramucirumab arm. Baseline EQ-5D-5L index and visual analogue scale scores were similar between arms, followed by relatively stable on-treatment scores. EQ-5D-5L scores worsened at post-discontinuation follow-up visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Ramucirumab plus docetaxel did not negatively impact QoL compared with docetaxel alone in platinum-refractory aUC. Improved TtD and tumor associated rates of pain favored ramucirumab treatment.

CLINICAL TRAIL REGISTRATION

NCT02426125. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02426125 . Date of registration: April 24th 2015.

Critical analysis of quality of life and cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) for patient's undergoing urologic oncology surgery: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been implemented across a variety of disciplines to improve outcomes. Herein we describe the impact of ERAS on quality of life (QOL) and cost for patients undergoing urologic oncology surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature search using the MEDLINE, Scopus, Clinictrials.gov, and Cochrane Review databases for studies published between 1946 and 2020 was conducted. Articles were reviewed and assigned a risk of bias by two authors and were included if they addressed ERAS and either QOL or cost-effectiveness for patients undergoing urologic oncology surgery.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded a total of 682 studies after removing duplicates, of which 10 (1.5%) were included in the review. Nine articles addressed radical cystectomy, while one addressed ERAS and QOL for laparoscopic nephrectomy. Six publications assessed the impact of ERAS on QOL domains. Questionnaires used for assessment of QOL varied across studies, and timing of administration was heterogeneous. Overall, ERAS improved patient QOL during early phases of recovery within the realms of bowel function, physical/social/cognitive functioning, sleep and pain control. Costs were assessed in 4 retrospective studies including 3 conducted in the United States and one from China all addressing radical cystectomy. Studies demonstrated either decreased costs associated with ERAS as a result of decreased length of stay or no change in cost based on ERAS implementation.

CONCLUSION

While limited studies are published on the subject, ERAS implementation for radical cystectomy and laparoscopic nephrectomy improved patient-reported QOL during early phases of recovery. For radical cystectomy, there was a decreased or neutral overall financial cost associated with ERAS. Further studies assessing QOL and cost-effectiveness over the entire global period of care in a variety of urologic oncology surgeries are warranted.

Health-related quality of life overview after different curative treatment options in muscle-invasive bladder cancer: an umbrella review

PURPOSE

This umbrella review aims to evaluate the quality, summarize and compare the conclusions of systematic reviews investigating the impact of curative treatment options on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were searched independently by two authors from inception until 06 January 2020. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses assessing the impact of any curative treatment option on HRQol in MIBC patients were eligible. Risk of bias was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 tool.

RESULTS

Thirty-two reviews were included. Robot-assisted RC with extracorporeal urinary diversion and open RC have similar HRQoL (n = 10). Evidence for pelvic organ-sparing RC was too limited (n = 2). Patients with a neobladder showed better overall and physical HRQoL outcomes, but worse urinary function in comparison with ileal conduit (n = 17). Bladder-preserving radiochemotherapy showed slightly better urinary and sexual but worse gastro-intestinal HRQoL outcomes in comparison with RC patients (n = 6). Quality of the reviews was low in more than 50% of the available reviews and most of the studies included in the reviews were nonrandomized studies.

CONCLUSION

This umbrella review gives a comprehensive overview of the available evidence to date.

Patient-reported outcomes in randomised clinical trials of bladder cancer: an updated systematic review

BACKGROUND

Despite international recommendations of including patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in randomised clinical trials (RCTs), a 2014 review concluded that few RCTs of bladder cancer (BC) report PRO as an outcome. We therefore aimed to update the 2014 review to synthesise current evidence-based knowledge of PROs from RCTs in BC. A secondary objective was to examine whether quality of PRO reporting has improved over time and to provide evidence-based recommendations for future studies in this area.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search using PubMed/Medline, from April 2014 until June 2018. We included the RCTs identified in the previous review as well as newly published RCTs. Studies were evaluated using a predefined electronic-data extraction form that included information on basic trial demographics, clinical and PRO characteristics and standards of PRO reporting based on recommendation from the International Society of Quality of Life Research.

RESULTS

Since April 2014 only eight new RCTs for BC included PROs as a secondary outcome. In terms of methodology, only the proportion of RCTs documenting the extent of missing PRO data (75% vs 11.1%, p = 0.03) and the identification of PROs in trial protocols (50% vs 0%, p = 0.015) improved. Statistical approaches for dealing with missing data were not reported in most new studies (75%).

CONCLUSION

Little improvement into the uptake and assessment of PRO as an outcome in RCTs for BC has been made during recent years. Given the increase in (immunotherapy) drug trials with a potential for severe adverse events, there is urgent need to adopt the recommendations and standards available for PRO use in bladder cancer RCTs.

Translation and validation of two disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures (Bladder Cancer Index and FACT-Bl-Cys) in Dutch bladder cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The Bladder Cancer Index (BCI) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bladder-Cystectomy (FACT-Bl-Cys) were developed to measure disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in bladder cancer patients and patients treated with radical cystectomy, respectively. Both patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are frequently used in clinical practice, but are not yet validated according to the COSMIN criteria and not yet available in Dutch. Therefore, the aim of this study was to translate the BCI and FACT-Bl-Cys into Dutch and to evaluate their measurement properties according to the COSMIN criteria.

METHODS

The BCI and FACT-Bl-Cys were translated into Dutch using a forward-backward method, and subsequently administered at baseline (pre-operatively) and 3 months post-operatively in bladder cancer patients who received a radical cystectomy. Validity (content and construct), reliability (internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and measurement error), floor and ceiling effects, and responsiveness were assessed according to the COSMIN criteria.

RESULTS

Forward-backward translation encountered no particular linguistic problems. In total 260 patients completed the baseline measurement, while 182 patients completed the three-month measurement. Only a ceiling effect was identified for the BCI. Hypotheses testing for construct validity was satisfying, as 67% and 92% of the hypothesized correlations were confirmed. Structural validity was moderate for both measures, as confirmatory factor analyses showed limited fit. Reliability of both PROMs was good. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of the BCI domains ranged from 0.47 to 0.93, minimal value of Cronbach's α was 0.70, smallest detectable change on group level (SDC group) ranged from 1.9 to 8.6. The ICC of the FACT-Bl-Cys domains ranged from 0.43 to 0.83, minimal value of Cronbach's α was 0.77, SDC group was around 1. Only the FACT-Bl-Cys total score was found to be responsive to changes in generic quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

The Dutch versions of the BCI and FACT-Bl-Cys were shown to be reliable and have good content validity. Structural validity was limited for both measures. Only the FACT-Bl-Cys total score was responsive to changes in generic HRQOL. Despite some limitations, both PROMs seem suitable for use in clinical practice and research.