Outcome reporting in bariatric surgery: an in-depth analysis to inform the development of a core outcome set, the BARIACT Study

Patient and healthcare practitioner evaluation of patient-reported outcomes in bariatric surgery - a modified Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes are an important emerging metric increasingly utilised in clinical, research and registry settings. These outcomes, while vital, are underutilised and require refinement for the specific patient population of those undergoing bariatric surgery. This study aimed to investigate and compare how pre-surgical patients, post-surgical patients, and healthcare practitioners evaluate patient-reported outcomes of bariatric surgery to identify outcomes that are considered most important.

METHODS

A modified Delphi survey was distributed to patients pre- and post-surgery, and to a variety of healthcare practitioners involved in bariatric care. Across two rounds, participants were asked to rate a variety of physical and psychosocial outcomes of bariatric surgery from 0 (Not Important) to 10 (Extremely Important). Outcomes rated 8-10 by at least 70% of participants were considered highly important (prioritised). The highest-rated outcomes were compared between the three groups as well as between medical and allied health practitioner subgroups.

RESULTS

20 pre-surgical patients, 95 post-surgical patients, and 28 healthcare practitioners completed both rounds of the questionnaire. There were 58 outcomes prioritised, with 21 outcomes (out of 90, 23.3%) prioritised by all three groups, 13 (14.4%) by two groups, and 24 (26.7%) prioritised by a single group or subgroup. Unanimously prioritised outcomes included 'Co-morbidities', 'General Physical Health', 'Overall Quality of Life' and 'Overall Mental Health'. Discordant outcomes included 'Fear of Weight Regain', 'Suicidal Thoughts', 'Addictive Behaviours', and 'Experience of Stigma or Discrimination'.

CONCLUSION

While there was considerable agreement between stakeholder groups on many outcomes, there remain several outcomes with discordant importance valuations that must be considered. In particular, healthcare practitioners prioritised 20 outcomes that were not prioritised by patients, emphasising the range of priorities across stakeholder groups. Future work will consider these priorities to ensure resulting measures encompass all important outcomes and are beneficial and valid for end users.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conservative management for adults with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones: the C-GALL RCT

Background

Gallstone disease is a common gastrointestinal disorder in industrialised societies. The prevalence of gallstones in the adult population is estimated to be approximately 10-15%, and around 80% remain asymptomatic. At present, cholecystectomy is the default option for people with symptomatic gallstone disease.

Objectives

To assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of observation/conservative management compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy for preventing recurrent symptoms and complications in adults presenting with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones in secondary care.

Design

Parallel group, multicentre patient randomised superiority pragmatic trial with up to 24 months follow-up and embedded qualitative research. Within-trial cost-utility and 10-year Markov model analyses. Development of a core outcome set for uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease.

Setting

Secondary care elective settings.

Participants

Adults with symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease referred to a secondary care setting were considered for inclusion.

Interventions

Participants were randomised 1: 1 at clinic to receive either laparoscopic cholecystectomy or observation/conservative management.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome was quality of life measured by area under the curve over 18 months using the Short Form-36 bodily pain domain. Secondary outcomes included the Otago gallstones' condition-specific questionnaire, Short Form-36 domains (excluding bodily pain), area under the curve over 24 months for Short Form-36 bodily pain domain, persistent symptoms, complications and need for further treatment. No outcomes were blinded to allocation.

Results

Between August 2016 and November 2019, 434 participants were randomised (217 in each group) from 20 United Kingdom centres. By 24 months, 64 (29.5%) in the observation/conservative management group and 153 (70.5%) in the laparoscopic cholecystectomy group had received surgery, median time to surgery of 9.0 months (interquartile range, 5.6-15.0) and 4.7 months (interquartile range 2.6-7.9), respectively. At 18 months, the mean Short Form-36 norm-based bodily pain score was 49.4 (standard deviation 11.7) in the observation/conservative management group and 50.4 (standard deviation 11.6) in the laparoscopic cholecystectomy group. The mean area under the curve over 18 months was 46.8 for both groups with no difference: mean difference -0.0, 95% confidence interval (-1.7 to 1.7); p-value 0.996; n = 203 observation/conservative, n = 205 cholecystectomy. There was no evidence of differences in quality of life, complications or need for further treatment at up to 24 months follow-up. Condition-specific quality of life at 24 months favoured cholecystectomy: mean difference 9.0, 95% confidence interval (4.1 to 14.0), p < 0.001 with a similar pattern for the persistent symptoms score. Within-trial cost-utility analysis found observation/conservative management over 24 months was less costly than cholecystectomy (mean difference -£1033). A non-significant quality-adjusted life-year difference of -0.019 favouring cholecystectomy resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £55,235. The Markov model continued to favour observation/conservative management, but some scenarios reversed the findings due to uncertainties in longer-term quality of life. The core outcome set included 11 critically important outcomes from both patients and healthcare professionals.

Conclusions

The results suggested that in the short term (up to 24 months) observation/conservative management may be a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources in selected patients, but subsequent surgeries in the randomised groups and differences in quality of life beyond 24 months could reverse this finding. Future research should focus on longer-term follow-up data and identification of the cohort of patients that should be routinely offered surgery.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN55215960.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 14/192/71) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 26. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Non-response After Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy-the Theoretical Need for Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Results from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry

BACKGROUND

Revisional surgery is a second-line treatment option after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric bypass (GBP) in patients with primary or secondary non-response. The aim was to analyze the theoretical need for revisional surgery after SG and GBP when applying four indication benchmarks.

METHOD

Based on data from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry, SG and GBP were compared regarding four endpoints: 1. excess weight loss (%EWL) < 50%, 2. weight regain of more than 10 kg after nadir, 3. fulfillment of previous IFSO-guidelines, or 4. ADA criteria for bariatric metabolic surgery 2 years after primary surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 60,426 individuals were included in the study (SG: n = 7856 and GBP: n = 52,570). Compared to patients in the GBP group, more SG patients failed to achieve a %EWL > 50% (23.0% versus 8.5%, p < .001), regained more than 10 kg after nadir (4.3% versus 2.5%, p < .001), and more often fulfilled the IFSO criteria (8.0% versus 4.5%, p < .001) or the ADA criteria (3.3% versus 1.8%, p < 001) at the 2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

SG is associated with a higher risk for weight non-response compared to GBP. To offer revisional bariatric surgery to all non-responders exceeds the bounds of feasibility and operability. Hence, individual prioritization and intensified evaluation of alternative second-line treatments are necessary.

Understanding the impact of radical changes in diet and the gut microbiota on brain function and structure: rationale and design of the EMBRACE study

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery leads to profound changes in gut microbiota and dietary patterns, both of which may interact to impact gut-brain communication. Though cognitive function improves postsurgery, there is a large variability in outcomes. How bariatric surgery-induced modifications in the gut microbiota and dietary patterns influence the variability in cognitive function is still unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To elucidate the associations between bariatric surgery-induced changes in dietary and gut microbiota patterns with cognition and brain structure.

SETTING

University hospital.

METHODS

A total of 120 adult patients (≥30 years) scheduled to undergo a primary bariatric surgery along with 60 age-, sex-, and body mass index-matched patients on the surgery waitlist will undergo assessments 3-months presurgery and 6- and 12-month postsurgery (or an equivalent time for the waitlist group). Additionally, 60 age-and sex-matched nonbariatric surgery eligible individuals will complete the presurgical assessments only. Evaluations will include sociodemographic and health behavior questionnaires, physiological assessments (anthropometrics, blood-, urine-, and fecal-based measures), neuropsychological cognitive tests, and structural magnetic resonance imaging. Cluster analyses of the dietary and gut microbiota changes will define the various dietary patterns and microbiota profiles, then using repeated measures mixed models, their associations with global cognitive and structural brain alterations will be explored.

RESULTS

The coordinating study site (Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, QC, Canada), provided the primary ethical approval (Research Ethics Board#: MP-32-2022-2412).

CONCLUSIONS

The insights generated from this study can be used to develop individually-targeted neurodegenerative disease prevention strategies, as well as providing critical mechanistic information.

Development of a Bariatric Surgery Core Data Set for an International Registry

PURPOSE

Bariatric and metabolic surgery is an effective treatment for severe and complex obesity; however, robust long-term data comparing operations is lacking. Clinical registries complement clinical trials in contributing to this evidence base. Agreement on standard data for bariatric registries is needed to facilitate comparisons. This study developed a Core Registry Set (CRS) - core data to include in bariatric surgery registries globally.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Relevant items were identified from a bariatric surgery research core outcome set, a registry data dictionary project, systematic literature searches, and a patient advisory group. This comprehensive list informed a questionnaire for a two-round Delphi survey with international health professionals. Participants rated each item's importance and received anonymized feedback in round 2. Using pre-defined criteria, items were then categorized for voting at a consensus meeting to agree the CRS.

RESULTS

Items identified from all sources were grouped into 97 questionnaire items. Professionals (n = 272) from 56 countries participated in the round 1 survey of which 45% responded to round 2. Twenty-four professionals from 13 countries participated in the consensus meeting. Twelve items were voted into the CRS including demographic and bariatric procedure information, effectiveness, and safety outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This CRS is the first step towards unifying bariatric surgery registries internationally. We recommend the CRS is included as a minimum dataset in all bariatric registries worldwide. Adoption of the CRS will enable meaningful international comparisons of bariatric operations. Future work will agree definitions and measures for the CRS including incorporating quality-of-life measures defined in a parallel project.

Surgeon Engagement with Patient-Reported Measures in Australian and Aotearoa New Zealand Bariatric Practices

PURPOSE

Patient-reported measures are an important emerging metric in outcome monitoring; however, they remain ill-defined and underutilized in bariatric clinical practice. This study aimed to determine the characteristics of patient-reported measures employed in bariatric practices across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, including barriers to their implementation and to what extent clinicians are receptive to their use.

METHODS

An online survey was distributed to all bariatric surgeons actively contributing to the Australian and Aotearoa New Zealand Bariatric Surgery Registry (n = 176). Participants reported their use of patient-reported measures and identified the most important and useful outcomes of patient-reported data for clinical practice.

RESULTS

Responses from 64 participants reported on 120 public and private bariatric practices across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand. Most participants reported no collection of any patient-reported measure (39 of 64; 60.9%), citing insufficient staff time or resources as the primary barrier to the collection of both patient-reported experience measures (34 of 102 practices; 33.3%) and patient-reported outcome measures (30 of 84 practices; 35.7%). Participants indicated data collection by the Registry would be useful (47 of 57; 82.5%), highlighting the most valuable application to be a monitoring tool, facilitating increased understanding of patient health needs, increased reporting of symptoms, and enhanced patient-physician communication.

CONCLUSION

Despite the current lack of patient-reported measures, there is consensus that such data would be valuable in bariatric practices. Widespread collection of patient-reported measures by registries could improve the collective quality of the data, while avoiding implementation barriers faced by individual surgeons and hospitals.

Stigma Toward Bariatric Surgery in the Netherlands, France, and the United Kingdom: Protocol for a Cross-cultural Mixed Methods Study

Background

Bariatric surgery is an effective procedure for the treatment of obesity. Despite this, only 0.1% to 2% of eligible individuals undergo surgery worldwide. The stigma surrounding surgery might be a reason for this. Thus far, no research has systematically studied the nature and implications of bariatric surgery stigma. The limited studies on bariatric surgery stigma are often conducted from the perspective of the public or health care professions and either use small and nonrepresentative samples or fail to capture the full essence and implications of the stigma altogether, including attitudes toward patients and perpetrators of the stigma. In addition, studies from patients’ perspectives are limited and tend to address bariatric surgery stigma superficially or implicitly. Finally, the extent to which cultural factors shape and facilitate this stigma and the experiences of patients have not yet been researched.

Objective

This study aimed to explore the perceptions, experiences, and consequences of bariatric surgery stigma from the perspective of the public, health care professionals, and patients before and after bariatric surgery. Furthermore, although the concept of stigma is universal, every society has specific cultural norms and values that define acceptable attributes and behaviors for its members. Therefore, this study also aimed to explore the extent to which cultural factors influence bariatric surgery stigma by comparing the Netherlands, France, and the United Kingdom.

Methods

This paper describes the protocol for a multiphase mixed methods research design. In the first part, we will conduct a scoping review to determine the current knowledge on bariatric surgery stigma and identify knowledge gaps. In the second part, semistructured interviews among patients before and after bariatric surgery will be conducted to explore their experiences and consequences of bariatric surgery stigma. In the third part, surveys will be conducted among both the public and health care professionals to determine the prevalence, nature, and impact of bariatric surgery stigma. Surveys and interviews will be conducted in the Netherlands, France, and the United Kingdom. Finally, data integration will be conducted at the interpretation and reporting levels.

Results

The study began in September 2020 and will continue through September 2025. With the results of the review, we will create an overview of the current knowledge regarding bariatric surgery stigma from patients’ perspectives. Qualitative data will provide insights into patients’ experiences with bariatric surgery stigma. Quantitative data will provide information related to the prevalence and nature of bariatric surgery stigma from the perspective of the public and health care professionals. Both qualitative and quantitative data will be compared for each country.

Conclusions

The findings from this study will lead to new insights that can be used to develop strategies to reduce bariatric surgery stigma and improve access, use, and outcomes of bariatric surgery.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/36753

The development of a core outcomes set for self-management interventions for patients living with obesity

Self-management interventions (SMIs) can improve the life of patients living with obesity. However, there is variability in the outcomes used to assess the effectiveness of SMIs and these are often not relevant for patients. In the context of COMPAR-EU, our aim was to develop a core outcome set (COS) for the evaluation of SMIs for patients with obesity. We followed a four steps multimethod approach: (1) the development of the initial catalogue of outcomes; (2) a scoping review of reviews on patients' values and preferences on outcomes of self-management (SM); (3) a Delphi survey including patients and patient representatives to rate the importance of outcomes; and (4) a 2-day consensus workshop with patients, patient representatives, healthcare professionals and researchers. The initial catalogue included 82 outcomes. Ten patients and patient's representatives participated in the Delphi survey. We identified 16 themes through the thematic synthesis of the scoping review that informed 37.80% of the outcomes on initial catalogue. Five patients, five healthcare professionals, and four researchers participated in the consensus workshop. After the consensus process, 15 outcomes were selected to be part of the final COS, and five supplementary outcomes were also provided. We developed a COS for the evaluation of SMIs in obesity with a significant involvement of patients and other key stakeholders. This COS will help improving data synthesis and increasing the value of SM research data in healthcare decision making.

Evaluation of the impact of gastric bypass surgery on eating behaviour using objective methodologies under residential conditions: Rationale and study protocol

Gastric bypass surgery leads to significant and sustained weight loss and a reduction in associated health risks in individuals with severe obesity. While reduced energy intake (EI) is the primary driver of weight loss following surgery, the underlying mechanisms accounting for this energy deficit are not well understood. The evidence base has been constrained by a lack of fit-for-purpose methodology in assessing food intake coupled with follow-up studies that are relatively short-term. This paper describes the underlying rationale and protocol for an observational, fully residential study using covert, objective methodology to evaluate changes in 24-hr food intake in patients (n = 31) at 1-month pre-surgery and 3-, 12- and 24-months post-surgery, compared to weight-stable controls (n = 32). The main study endpoints included change in EI, macronutrient intake, food preferences, and eating behaviours (speed, frequency, and duration of eating). Other physiological changes that may influence EI and weight regulation including changes in body composition, circulating appetite hormones, resting metabolic rate, total energy expenditure and gastrointestinal symptoms were also evaluated. Understanding which mechanisms contribute to a reduction in EI and weight loss post-surgery could potentially help to identify those individuals who are most likely to benefit from gastric bypass surgery as well as those that may need more targeted intervention to optimise their weight loss post-surgery. Furthermore, clarification of these mechanisms may also inform targeted approaches for non-surgical treatments of obesity.

Outcome reporting in trials on conservative interventions for pelvic organ prolapse: A systematic review for the development of a core outcome set

BACKGROUND

Significant risk of bias and limitations in outcome selections in trials evaluating conservative treatments for the management of Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) have been highlighted and preclude comparability of outcomes, synthesis of primary studies and high quality evidence.

OBJECTIVES

As systematic review of the reported outcomes is the first step in the process of development of a Core Outcome Set (COS), we aimed to systematically review reporting of outcomes and outcome measures in Randomised Control Trials (RCTs) on conservative treatments for POP and develop an inventory of them for consideration as core outcome and outcome measures sets. We evaluated methodological quality, outcome reporting quality and publication characteristics and their associations among published RCTs.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review of RCTs identified from the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE and MEDLINE (Pubmed). RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of conservative interventions for the management of POP were considered for inclusion. Outcomes and outcome measures were obtained from the RCTs and an inventory was created. Outcomes were grouped in domains and themes. Methodological quality, outcome reporting quality and publication characteristics were evaluated and statistically analysed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five trials (3179 women) were included and reported 31 outcomes and 50 outcome measures. Reporting rates of the outcomes investigated ranged between 4% and 56%. The most commonly reported outcome domains were patient reported symptoms, stage of POP expressed as POP-Q stage, and quality of life. Univariate analysis demonstrated no significant correlations of methodological and outcome reporting parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need to increase comparability of RCTs. Reporting standardized outcomes included in a COS for conservative interventions for POP will facilitate the comparability across RCTs. While the process of developing COS is in progress, we propose the interim use of the three most commonly reported outcomes in each domain: patient-reported outcomes (symptom distress including bowel and urinary symptoms, sexual function), stage of prolapse and quality of life parameters using validated questionnaires (Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20), Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire/Health related quality of life (PFIQ-7/HRQOL) and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Impact Questionnaire (POPIQ-7).

Identification and categorisation of relevant outcomes for symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease: in-depth analysis to inform the development of a core outcome set

BACKGROUND

Many completed trials of interventions for uncomplicated gallstone disease are not as helpful as they could be due to lack of standardisation across studies, outcome definition, collection and reporting. This heterogeneity of outcomes across studies hampers useful synthesis of primary studies and ultimately negatively impacts on decision making by all stakeholders. Core outcome sets offer a potential solution to this problem of heterogeneity and concerns over whether the 'right' outcomes are being measured. One of the first steps in core outcome set generation is to identify the range of outcomes reported (in the literature or by patients directly) that are considered important.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a systematic map that examines the variation in outcome reporting of interventions for uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease, and to identify other outcomes of importance to patients with gallstones not previously measured or reported in interventional studies.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 794 potentially relevant titles and abstracts of which 137 were deemed eligible for inclusion. A total of 129 randomised controlled trials, 4 gallstone disease specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and 8 qualitative studies were included. This was supplemented with data from 6 individual interviews, 1 focus group (n=5 participants) and analysis of 20 consultations. A total of 386 individual recorded outcomes were identified across the combined evidence: 330 outcomes (which were reported 1147 times) from trials evaluating interventions, 22 outcomes from PROMs, 17 outcomes from existing qualitative studies and 17 outcomes from primary qualitative research. Areas of overlap between the evidence sources existed but also the primary research contributed new, unreported in this context, outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study took a rigorous approach to catalogue and map the outcomes of importance in gallstone disease to enhance the development of the COS 'long' list. A COS for uncomplicated gallstone disease that considers the views of all relevant stakeholders is needed.

Methodological issues in assessing change in dietary intake and appetite following gastric bypass surgery: A systematic review

Gastric bypass surgery is an effective long-term treatment for individuals with severe obesity. Changes in appetite, dietary intake, and food preferences have all been postulated to contribute to postoperative body weight regulation, however, findings are inconsistent. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current literature on changes in dietary intake and appetite following gastric bypass surgery, in the context of the methodology used and the analysis, interpretation, and presentation of results. Four databases were systematically searched with terms related to "gastric bypass surgery," "appetite," and "dietary intake," and 49 papers (n = 2384 patients after gastric bypass) were eligible for inclusion. The evidence indicated that only a reduction in overall energy intake and an increase in postprandial satiety are maintained beyond 6-month post-surgery, whereas relative macronutrient intake and premeal hunger remain unchanged. However, available data were limited by inconsistencies in the methods, analysis, presentation, and interpretation of results. In particular, there was a reliance on data collected by subjective methods with minimal acknowledgment of the limitations, such as misreporting of food intake. There is a need for further work employing objective measurement of appetite and dietary intake following gastric bypass surgery to determine how these mechanisms may contribute to weight regulation in the longer term.

Systematic Review of Innovation Reporting in Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel endoscopic procedure used to treat obesity-related comorbidities. Whilst its use is increasing in clinical practice, there is comparatively little understanding about how it has been evaluated. This study aimed to systematically summarize and appraise the reporting of ESG in the context of guidelines for evaluating innovative surgical devices and procedures.

METHODS

Systematic searches were used to identify all published studies reporting ESG insertion. Data collected included patient selection, governance arrangements, proceduralist expertise, technique description and outcome reporting.

RESULTS

Searches identified 2289 abstracts; 37 full-text papers were included (one prospective comparative cohort study, 16 retrospective cohort studies, 17 prospective cohort studies and three case reports). No randomized trials were identified. Eighteen studies were conducted prospectively. The number of patients in the included studies ranged from 1 to 1000. The lower BMI limit ranged from 27 to 35 kg/m². Research approvals were reported in 26 studies. Two studies reported on the learning curve. All studies reported some aspect of technical implementation, but many variations were noted. Suturing device used and suture pattern were the most commonly reported aspects (32 studies). Follow-up ranged from 1 to 24 months, but was 12 months or less in 28 studies. Forty-eight different outcomes were reported across all studies.

CONCLUSION

The literature on ESG has demonstrated some progression in reporting and analysis and the next stage of assessment should be a randomized controlled trial to demonstrate efficacy.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative behavioral lifestyle and nutritional interventions in bariatric surgery: a call for better research and reporting

Bariatric surgery is considered the most effective treatment for people with morbid obesity, and certain interventions could enhance its long-term results. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and trial registers up to January 1, 2020. Randomized controlled trials, where behavioral lifestyle or nutritional interventions were provided perioperatively were included. Primary outcome was weight change. Two reviewers independently performed each stage of the review. Altogether 6652 references were screened. 31 studies were included for qualitative synthesis and 22 studies for quantitative synthesis. Interventions varied greatly, thus limiting possibility of synthesizing all results. Six groups of interventions were discerned, and we used standardized mean differences for synthesis. Low to very-low certainty evidence suggests that physical activity, nonvitamin nutritional interventions, vitamins, psychotherapy, and counseling but not combined interventions might bring some benefit regarding short-term postsurgery follow-ups (up to 12 mo), but the estimates varied and results were not statistically significant, except for 12 months follow-ups regarding counseling. Psychotherapy and counseling, but not vitamins and combined interventions, may provide some benefit at longer follow-ups (over 12 mo), but the certainty of evidence was low to very-low and statistically significant results were observed in comparisons including data from single studies with small sample sizes only. Included studies expressed an outcome "weight change" using 20 different measures. Misreporting of data and huge variety of outcomes do not benefit systematic analyses and may possibly lead to confusion of both researchers and readers. We suggest that authors follow a predefined set of outcomes when reporting the results of their studies. The initiative to produce "core outcome set" for clinical trials in bariatric surgery trials is currently underway.

Low serum insulin-like growth factor-1 level is a predictor of low total weight loss percentage after sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Obesity is a leading cause of metabolic disorders and mortality. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) confers beneficial effects not only on weight but also on metabolic disorder development. However, some patients show insufficient weight loss after LSG. A total weight loss percentage (%TWL) <20% after LSG is defined as insufficient. The prediction of patients with insufficient weight loss after LSG before the procedure is performed may prove helpful.

OBJECTIVES

To determine predictors of %TWL after LSG.

SETTING

Longitudinal study in a university hospital.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 90 obese patients who underwent LSG and were followed up for 12 months thereafter. We analyzed the relationship between %TWL and preoperative clinical parameters, such as age, sex, body mass index, lipid and glucose metabolism, and some hormones. Patients were divided into 2 groups, %TWL <20% and 20% ≤ %TWL. Multiple regression model and logistic regression models were performed.

RESULTS

LSG led to significant improvements in weight, liver, and kidney function, and lipid and glucose metabolism. The serum insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) level was significantly lower in patients with %TWL <20%. Sex, diabetes presence, body mass index, and IGF-1 were independent predictors of %TWL. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that the cutoff value of IGF-1 for %TWL <20% was 100.0ng/mL. Male sex, diabetes presence, lower preoperative BMI, and IGF-1 values were independently associated with lower %TWL (%TWL <20%).

CONCLUSIONS

Serum IGF-1 can be used to screen for patients at risk of low %TWL after LSG.

A systematic review on reported outcomes and outcome measures in female idiopathic chronic pelvic pain for the development of a core outcome set

BACKGROUND

A core outcome set (COS) is required to address inconsistencies in outcome reporting in chronic pelvic pain (CPP) trials.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluation of reported outcomes and selected outcome measures in CPP trials by producing a comprehensive inventory to inform a COS.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) identified from Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase and MEDLINE databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs assessing efficacy and safety of medical, surgical and psychological interventions for women with idiopathic CPP.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent researchers extracted outcomes and outcome measures. Similar outcomes were grouped and classified into domains to produce a structured inventory.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-four trials were identified including 136 reported outcomes and outcome measures. Rates of reporting outcomes varied (4-100%) and pelvic pain was the most frequently reported outcome (100%). All trials reported the pain domain; however, only half reported quality of life, clinical effectiveness and adverse events. No differences in outcome reporting were observed in five high-quality trials (21%). Univariate analysis demonstrated an association between quality of outcome reporting and methodological quality of studies (r_s  = 0.407, P = 0.048).

CONCLUSION

There is wide variation in reported outcomes and applied outcome measures in CPP trials. While a COS is being developed and implemented, we propose the interim use of commonly reported outcomes in each domain: pain (pelvic pain, dyspareunia, dysmenorrhoea), life impact (quality of life, emotional functioning, physical functioning), clinical effectiveness (efficacy, satisfaction, cost effectiveness, return to daily activities) and adverse events (surgical, perioperative observations, nonsurgical).

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

There is significant variation in outcome reporting in CPP trials. Our systematic review forms the basis for the development of a core outcome set.

Gastric Bypass Versus Sleeve Gastrectomy: Patient Selection and Short-term Outcome of 47,101 Primary Operations From the Swedish, Norwegian, and Dutch National Quality Registries

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the use and short-term outcome of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND

Although bariatric surgery is performed in high volumes worldwide, no consensus exists regarding the choice of bariatric procedure for specific groups of patients.

METHODS

Data from 3 national registries for bariatric surgery were used. Patient selection, perioperative data (severe complications, mortality, and rate of readmissions within 30 days), and 1-year results (follow-up rate and weight loss) were studied.

RESULTS

A total of 47,101 primary operations were registered, 33,029 (70.1%) RYGB and 14,072 (29.9%) SG. Patients receiving RYGB met international guidelines for having bariatric surgery more often than those receiving SG (91.9% vs 83,0%, P < 0.001). The 2 procedures did not differ in the rate of severe complications (2.6% vs 2.4%, P = 0.382), nor 30-day mortality (0.04% vs 0.03%, P = 0.821). Readmission rates were higher after RYGB (4.3% vs 3.4%, P < 0.001).One-year post surgery, less RYGB-patients were lost-to follow-up (12.1% vs 16.5%, P < 0.001) and RYGB resulted in a higher rate of patients with total weight loss of more than 20% (95.8% vs 84.6%, P < 0.001). While the weight-loss after RYGB was similar between hospitals, there was a great variation in weight loss after SG.

CONCLUSION

This study reflects the pragmatic use and short-term outcome of RYGB and SG in 3 countries in North-Western Europe. Both procedures were safe, with RYGB having higher weight loss and follow-up rates at the cost of a slightly higher 30-day readmission rate.

Ongoing Inconsistencies in Weight Loss Reporting Following Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review

Weight loss is the primary outcome following bariatric surgery; however, its documentation within current literature is heterogeneous and poorly defined, limiting meaningful comparison between studies. Randomized controlled trials from 2012 to 2016 were identified using the Medline database through "Gastric bypass OR sleeve gastrectomy AND weight" search terms. A total of 73 studies with 5948 patients were included. Reporting of preoperative weight was done primarily using mean body mass index (BMI) (87.7%) and mean weight (65.8%). Postoperative weight reporting was more variable, with the most frequently reported measure being mean postoperative BMI (71.2%). Overall, nearly one third of all bariatric literature contained discrepancies that precluded meaningful meta-analysis. Reporting of weight loss following bariatric surgery is becoming increasingly diverse for both pre- and post-operative outcomes. Ongoing heterogeneity will continue to act as a barrier to meaningful comparison of bariatric outcomes until standardized reporting practices become adopted.

Outcome reporting from clinical trials of non-valvular atrial fibrillation treated with traditional Chinese medicine or Western medicine: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To examine variation in outcomes, outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) and measurement times in clinical trials of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and to identify outcomes for prioritisation in developing a core outcome set (COS) in this field.

DESIGN

This study was a systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Clinical trials published between January 2015 and March 2019 were obtained from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wanfang Database, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure and SinoMed.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were considered. Interventions included traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine. The required treatment duration or follow-up time was ≥4 weeks. The required sample size was ≥30 and≥50 in each group in RCTs and observational studies, respectively. We excluded trials that aimed to investigate the outcome of complications of NVAF, to assess the mechanisms or pharmacokinetics, or for which full text could not be acquired.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The general information and outcomes, OMIs and measurement times were extracted. The methodological and outcome reporting quality were assessed. The results were analysed by descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 218 articles were included from 25 255 articles. For clinical trials of antiarrhythmic therapy, 69 outcomes from 16 outcome domains were reported, and 28 (31.82%, 28/88) outcomes were reported only once; the most frequently reported outcome was ultrasonic cardiogram. Thirty-one outcomes (44.93%, 31/69) were provided definitions or OMIs; the outcome measurement times ranged from 1 to 20 with a median of 3. For clinical trials of anticoagulation therapy, 82 outcomes from 18 outcome domains were reported; 38 (29.23%, 38/130) outcomes were reported only once. The most frequently reported outcome was ischaemic stroke. Forty (48.78%, 40/82) outcomes were provided OMIs or definitions; and the outcome measurement times ranged from 1 to 27 with a median of 8.

CONCLUSION

Outcome reporting in NVAF is inconsistent. Thus, developing a COS that can be used in clinical trials is necessary.

Comparative long-term effectiveness and safety of primary bariatric surgeries in treating type 2 diabetes mellitus in adults: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Bariatric surgeries are effective in treating obesity related comorbidities, including type 2 diabetes mellitus. More robust evidence is needed to facilitate choice of procedure. In this systemic review, we aim to investigate the comparative long-term effectiveness in inducing remission of type 2 diabetes, halting diabetic complications, reducing mortality and the safety of conventional and emerging bariatric surgeries.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Databases including Cochrane Central Register, EMBASE, MEDLINE and clinical trial registries will be searched for randomised controlled trials with at least 3 years of follow-up, including direct and/or indirect evidence regarding primary bariatric surgeries in overweight or obese adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus, from inception of each database to 2019, with no language or publication type limits imposed. Dual selection of studies, data extraction and risk of bias assessments will be performed. Primary outcomes include full diabetes remission, composite outcome of full or partial diabetes remission and adverse event profiles. Secondary outcomes include anthropometric measurements, cardiovascular risk factor burden, medication burden, diabetic complications and all-cause mortality. Given sufficient homogeneity, network meta-analyses will be performed in a random-effects model based on the Bayesian framework, while assessing for consistency between direct and indirect estimates. Heterogeneities of studies will be explored through meta-regression analysis, and robustness of findings will be checked by sensitivity analysis, and an alternative method under a frequentist framework. All statistical analysis and graphical presentations will be conducted by R software V.3.3.3 (The R Project for Statistical Computing). The overall quality of the evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria for each outcome.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required as individual patient data will not be included. This review will be subject for publication in a peer reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018110775.

Systematic review of clinical outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials of burn care

INTRODUCTION

Systematic reviews collate trial data to provide evidence to support clinical decision-making. For effective synthesis, there must be consistency in outcome reporting. There is no agreed set of outcomes for reporting the effect of burn care interventions. Issues with outcome reporting have been identified, although not systematically investigated. This study gathers empirical evidence on any variation in outcome reporting and assesses the need for a core outcome set for burn care research.

METHODS

Electronic searches of four search engines were undertaken from January 2012 to December 2016 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), using medical subject headings and free text terms including 'burn', 'scald' 'thermal injury' and 'RCT'. Two authors independently screened papers, extracted outcomes verbatim and recorded the timing of outcome measurement. Duplicate outcomes (exact wording ± different spelling), similar outcomes (albumin in blood, serum albumin) and identical outcomes measured at different times were removed. Variation in outcome reporting was determined by assessing the number of unique outcomes reported across all included trials. Outcomes were classified into domains. Bias was reduced using five researchers and a patient working independently and together.

RESULTS

147 trials were included, of which 127 (86.4%) were RCTs, 13 (8.8%) pilot studies and 7 (4.8%) RCT protocols. 1494 verbatim clinical outcomes were reported; 955 were unique. 76.8% of outcomes were measured within 6 months of injury. Commonly reported outcomes were defined differently. Numbers of unique outcomes per trial varied from one to 37 (median 9; IQR 5,13). No single outcome was reported across all studies demonstrating inconsistency of reporting. Outcomes were classified into 54 domains. Numbers of outcomes per domain ranged from 1 to 166 (median 11; IQR 3,24).

CONCLUSIONS

This review has demonstrated heterogeneity in outcome reporting in burn care research which will hinder amalgamation of study data. We recommend the development of a Core Outcome Set.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017060908.

Reporting of outcomes in gastric cancer surgery trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The development of clinical guidelines for the surgical management of gastric cancer should be based on robust evidence from well-designed trials. Being able to reliably compare and combine the outcomes of these trials is a key factor in this process.

OBJECTIVES

To examine variation in outcome reporting by surgical trials for gastric cancer and to identify outcomes for prioritisation in an international consensus study to develop a core outcome set in this field.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic literature searches (Evidence Based Medicine, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP) and a review of study protocols of randomised controlled trials, published between 1996 and 2016.

INTERVENTION

Therapeutic surgical interventions for gastric cancer. Outcomes were listed verbatim, categorised into groups (outcome themes) and examined for definitions and measurement instruments.

RESULTS

Of 1919 abstracts screened, 32 trials (9073 participants) were identified. A total of 749 outcomes were reported of which 96 (13%) were accompanied by an attempted definition. No single outcome was reported by all trials. 'Adverse events' was the most frequently reported 'outcome theme' in which 240 unique terms were described. 12 trials (38%) classified complications according to severity, with 5 (16%) using a formal classification system (Clavien-Dindo or Accordion scale). Of 27 trials which described 'short-term' mortality, 15 (47%) used one of five different definitions. 6 out of the 32 trials (19%) described 'patient-reported outcomes'.

CONCLUSION

Reporting of outcomes in gastric cancer surgery trials is inconsistent. A consensus approach to develop a minimum set of well-defined, standardised outcomes to be used by all future trials examining therapeutic surgical interventions for gastric cancer is needed. This should consider the views of all key stakeholders, including patients.

Butyrate reduces appetite and activates brown adipose tissue via the gut-brain neural circuit

OBJECTIVE

Butyrate exerts metabolic benefits in mice and humans, the underlying mechanisms being still unclear. We aimed to investigate the effect of butyrate on appetite and energy expenditure, and to what extent these two components contribute to the beneficial metabolic effects of butyrate.

DESIGN

Acute effects of butyrate on appetite and its method of action were investigated in mice following an intragastric gavage or intravenous injection of butyrate. To study the contribution of satiety to the metabolic benefits of butyrate, mice were fed a high-fat diet with butyrate, and an additional pair-fed group was included. Mechanistic involvement of the gut-brain neural circuit was investigated in vagotomised mice.

RESULTS

Acute oral, but not intravenous, butyrate administration decreased food intake, suppressed the activity of orexigenic neurons that express neuropeptide Y in the hypothalamus, and decreased neuronal activity within the nucleus tractus solitarius and dorsal vagal complex in the brainstem. Chronic butyrate supplementation prevented diet-induced obesity, hyperinsulinaemia, hypertriglyceridaemia and hepatic steatosis, largely attributed to a reduction in food intake. Butyrate also modestly promoted fat oxidation and activated brown adipose tissue (BAT), evident from increased utilisation of plasma triglyceride-derived fatty acids. This effect was not due to the reduced food intake, but explained by an increased sympathetic outflow to BAT. Subdiaphragmatic vagotomy abolished the effects of butyrate on food intake as well as the stimulation of metabolic activity in BAT.

CONCLUSION

Butyrate acts on the gut-brain neural circuit to improve energy metabolism via reducing energy intake and enhancing fat oxidation by activating BAT.

Overweight and obesity management strategies in survivors of paediatric acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia is the most common paediatric cancer. Survivors of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (SALL) are at risk of obesity and related cardiometabolic diseases including type 2 diabetes, hypertension, stroke and cardiovascular events. Therefore, it is important to address obesity in this population as this may help mitigate future cardiometabolic comorbidities. In this systematic review, we aim to assess current treatment strategies including lifestyle interventions, pharmacotherapy and bariatric surgery to manage overweight and obesity in SALL.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search the following databases for primary studies: CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. In addition, unpublished primary studies will be searched in ClinicalTrials.gov as well as conference proceedings, presentations, abstracts, editorials and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses A&I. Reviewers will perform title, abstract, and full-text screening as well as data abstraction and risk of bias assessment independently with a third reviewer to be consulted to resolve disagreements. Searches will be run and updated through May 1st, 2018. The overall quality of the evidence will be determined using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria for each outcome. A meta-analysis will be performed if two studies deploying similar interventions, populations, and design and outcomes are identified.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

As individual patient data will not be included, we do not require ethics approval. This review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016051031.

Inconsistent selection of outcomes and measurement devices found in shoulder arthroplasty research: An analysis of studies on ClinicalTrials.gov

Introduction

Recent evidence suggests a lack of standardization of shoulder arthroplasty outcomes. This issue is a limiting factor in systematic reviews. Core outcome set (COS) methodology could address this problem by delineating a minimum set of outcomes for measurement in all shoulder arthroplasty trials.

Methods

A ClinicalTrials.gov search yielded 114 results. Eligible trials were coded on the following characteristics: study status, study type, arthroplasty type, sample size, measured outcomes, outcome measurement device, specific metric of measurement, method of aggregation, outcome classification, and adverse events.

Results

Sixty-six trials underwent data abstraction and data synthesis. Following abstraction, 383 shoulder arthroplasty outcomes were organized into 11 outcome domains. The most commonly reported outcomes were shoulder outcome score (n = 58), pain (n = 33), and quality of life (n = 15). The most common measurement devices were the Constant-Murley Shoulder Outcome Score (n = 38) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (n = 33). Temporal patterns of outcome use was also found.

Conclusion

Our study suggests the need for greater standardization of outcomes and instruments. The lack of consistency across trials indicates that developing a core outcome set for shoulder arthroplasty trials would be worthwhile. Such standardization would allow for more effective comparison across studies in systematic reviews, while at the same time consider important outcomes that may be underrepresented otherwise. This review of outcomes provides an evidence-based foundation for the development of a COS for shoulder arthroplasty.

Standardising the reporting of outcomes in gastric cancer surgery trials: protocol for the development of a core outcome set and accompanying outcome measurement instrument set (the GASTROS study)

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Whilst surgery is the mainstay of curative treatment, it is associated with significant risks. Surgical strategies for treating gastric cancer should be based on evidence from systematic reviews of well-designed randomised controlled trials. However, inconsistencies in the reporting of outcomes from these trials makes evidence synthesis unreliable. We present a protocol for an international consensus study to develop a standardised set of outcomes and measurement tools - a 'core outcome set' (COS) - to be used by all future trials examining therapeutic surgical interventions for gastric cancer. The GASTROS study aims to standardise the reporting of outcomes in gastric cancer surgery trials through an international consensus process of key stakeholders including health care professionals and patients.

METHODS

The first of three stages in the study will identify a 'long-list' of potentially important outcomes to be prioritised. These will be extracted from a systematic review of relevant academic literature and patient interviews. Stage 2 will comprise an eDelphi survey which will consider the views of patients, nurse specialists and surgeons to prioritise the most important outcomes. A meeting of stakeholder representatives will ratify the COS. Stage 3 will focus on identifying appropriate instruments to measure the prioritised outcomes by means of quality assessment of available measurement instruments and stakeholder consultation.

DISCUSSION

This study aims to standardise the reporting of outcomes in future trials examining therapeutic surgical interventions for gastric cancer. It is anticipated that standardisation of outcome reporting in these surgical effectiveness trials will enhance the evidence base for clinical practice. Highlighting outcomes of greatest importance to patients will ensure that their perspectives are central to research in this field.

The COMET Handbook: version 1.0

The selection of appropriate outcomes is crucial when designing clinical trials in order to compare the effects of different interventions directly. For the findings to influence policy and practice, the outcomes need to be relevant and important to key stakeholders including patients and the public, health care professionals and others making decisions about health care. It is now widely acknowledged that insufficient attention has been paid to the choice of outcomes measured in clinical trials. Researchers are increasingly addressing this issue through the development and use of a core outcome set, an agreed standardised collection of outcomes which should be measured and reported, as a minimum, in all trials for a specific clinical area.Accumulating work in this area has identified the need for guidance on the development, implementation, evaluation and updating of core outcome sets. This Handbook, developed by the COMET Initiative, brings together current thinking and methodological research regarding those issues. We recommend a four-step process to develop a core outcome set. The aim is to update the contents of the Handbook as further research is identified.

A systematic review of the outcomes reported in trials of medication review in older patients: the need for a core outcome set

AIM

Medication review has been advocated as one of the measures to tackle the challenge of polypharmacy in older patients, yet there is no consensus on how best to evaluate its efficacy. This study aimed to assess outcome reporting in trials of medication review in older patients.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective studies and RCT protocols involving medication review performed in patients aged 65 years or older in any setting of care were identified from: (1) a recent systematic review; (2) RCT registries of ongoing studies; (3) the Cochrane library. The type, definition, and frequency of all outcomes reported were extracted independently by two researchers.

RESULTS

Forty-seven RCTs or prospective published studies and 32 RCT protocols were identified. A total of 327 distinct outcomes were identified in the 47 published studies. Only one fifth (21%) of the studies evaluated the impact of medication reviews on adverse events such as drug reactions or drug-related hospital admissions. Most of the outcomes were related to medication use (n = 114, 35%) and healthcare use (n = 74, 23%). Very few outcomes were patient-related (n = 24, 7%). A total of 248 distinct outcomes were identified in the 32 RCT protocols. Overall, the number of outcomes and the number and type of health domains covered by the outcomes varied largely.

CONCLUSION

Outcome reporting from RCTs concerning medication review in older patients is heterogeneous. This review highlights the need for a standardized core outcome set for medication review in older patients, to improve outcome reporting and evidence synthesis.

A Comparison of Health Professionals' and Patients' Views of the Importance of Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery

BACKGROUND

A comprehensive evaluation of bariatric surgery is required to inform decision-making. This will include measures of benefit and risk. It is possible that stakeholders involved with surgery value these outcomes differently, although this has not previously been explored. This study aimed to investigate and compare how professionals and patients prioritise outcomes of bariatric surgery.

METHODS

Systematic reviews and qualitative interviews created an exhaustive list of outcomes. This informed the development of a 130-item questionnaire, structured in four sections (complications of surgery; clinical effectiveness; signs, symptoms, and other measures; quality of life). Health professionals and patients rated the importance of each item on a 1-9 scale. Items rated 8-9 by at least 70 % of the participants were considered prioritised. Items prioritised in each section were compared between professionals and patients and interrater agreement assessed using kappa statistics (ĸ).

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-eight out of four hundred fifty-nine professionals (36.6 %) and 90/465 patients (19.4 %) completed the questionnaire. Professionals and patients prioritised 18 and 25 items, respectively, with 10 overlapping items and 23 discordant items (ĸ 0.363). Examples of items prioritised by both included 'diabetes' and 'leakage from bowel joins'. Examples of discordant items included 're-admission rates' (professionals only) and 'excess skin' (patients only). Poor agreement was seen in the 'quality of life' section (0 overlapping items, 8 discordant, ĸ -0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

Although there was some overlap of outcomes prioritised by professionals and patients, there were important differences. We recommend that the views of all relevant health professionals and patients are considered when deciding on outcomes to evaluate bariatric surgery.

A Core Outcome Set for the Benefits and Adverse Events of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery: The BARIACT Project

BACKGROUND

Bariatric and metabolic surgery is used as a treatment for patients with severe and complex obesity. However, there is a need to improve outcome selection and reporting in bariatric surgery trials. A Core Outcome Set (COS), an agreed minimum set of outcomes reported in all studies of a specific condition, may achieve this. Here, we present the development of a COS for BARIAtric and metabolic surgery Clinical Trials-the BARIACT Study.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Outcomes identified from systematic reviews and patient interviews informed a questionnaire survey. Patients and health professionals were surveyed three times and asked to rate the importance of each item on a 1-9 scale. Delphi methods provided anonymised feedback to participants. Items not meeting predefined criteria were discarded between rounds. Remaining items were discussed at consensus meetings, held separately with patients and professionals, where the COS was agreed. Data sources identified 2,990 outcomes, which were used to develop a 130-item questionnaire. Round 1 response rates were moderate but subsequently improved to above 75% for other rounds. After rounds 2 and 3, 81 and 14 items were discarded, respectively, leaving 35 items for discussion at consensus meetings. The final COS included nine items: "weight," "diabetes status," "cardiovascular risk," "overall quality of life (QOL)," "mortality," "technical complications of the specific operation," "any re-operation/re-intervention," "dysphagia/regurgitation," and "micronutrient status." The main limitation of this study was that it was based in the United Kingdom only.

CONCLUSIONS

The COS is recommended to be used as a minimum in all trials of bariatric and metabolic surgery. Adoption of the COS will improve data synthesis and the value of research data. Future work will establish methods for the measurement of the outcomes in the COS.

Exploring methods the for selection and integration of stakeholder views in the development of core outcome sets: a case study in reconstructive breast surgery

Background

The development and use of core outcome sets (COSs) in trials may improve data synthesis and reduce outcome reporting bias. The selection of outcomes in COSs is informed by views of key stakeholders, yet little is known about the role and influence of different stakeholders’ views during COS development. We report an exploratory case study examining how stakeholder selection and incorporation of stakeholders’ views may influence the selection of outcomes for a COS in reconstructive breast surgery (RBS). We also make recommendations for future considerations.

Methods

Key stakeholder groups and subgroups were identified from the literature and expert opinion by the COS management group. They included health care professionals, subdivided by profession (breast and plastic surgeons, specialist nurses and psychologists) and patients, subdivided according to type of surgery received, timing of reconstruction, time since surgery and patient age. All participated in a survey in which they were asked to prioritise outcomes. Outcomes were prioritised using a 9-point scale from 1 (not important) to 9 (extremely important). The proportion of (1) all participants, ignoring stakeholder group (single heterogeneous panel analysis), (2) ‘professional’ and ‘patient’ groups separately (two heterogeneous panels), ignoring prespecified subgroups and (3) each participant subgroup separately (multiple homogeneous panel analysis) rating each item ‘extremely important’ was summarised and compared to explore how selection and integration of stakeholder views may influence outcome prioritisation.

Results

There were many overlaps between items rated as most important by all groups. Specific stakeholders, however, prioritised specific concerns and a broader range of outcomes were prioritised when the subgroups were considered separately. For example, two additional outcomes were prioritised when patient and professional groups were considered separately and eight additional outcomes were identified when the views of the individual subgroups were explored. In general, patient subgroups preferentially valued additional clinical outcomes, including unplanned surgery, whereas professional subgroups prioritised additional psychosocial issues including body image.

Conclusion

Stakeholder groups value different outcomes. Selection of groups, therefore, is important. Our recommendations for robust and transparent stakeholder selection and integration of stakeholder views may aid future COS developers in the design and conduct of their studies and improve the validity and value of future COS.

The effectiveness of interventions to treat obesity in survivors of childhood brain tumors: a systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Pediatric brain tumors are the most common solid tumors in children. Advances in understanding the hallmarks of cancer biology and novel therapies have led to an increasing number of survivors of childhood brain tumors (SCBT). However, these survivors are at an increased risk of obesity and cardiometabolic disorders that affect their quality of life and lifespan. It is important to define effective strategies to treat and prevent obesity in this population. This systematic review aims to investigate the effectiveness of lifestyle interventions, pharmacotherapy, and bariatric surgery on treating obesity in SCBT.

METHODS

Searches will be conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Review, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect (DARE). In addition, ClinicalTrials.gov and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses A&I will be searched to identify relevant gray literature. The reference lists of eligible articles will be searched for additional studies. All screening, quality assessment, and data abstraction will be done independently by two reviewers. We will perform meta-analysis if there are sufficient studies.

DISCUSSION

This review will summarize evidence for the effectiveness of interventions used to reduce obesity risk in SCBT. This has significant implications for SCBT, as it can identify gaps in knowledge and provide insights into the development of new interventions to manage obesity in survivors, which may improve their outcomes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42015025909.

The use of adjustable gastric bands for management of severe and complex obesity

BACKGROUND

Obesity levels in the UK have reached a sustained high and ∼4% of the population would be candidates for bariatric surgery based upon current UK NICE guidelines, which has important implications for Clinical Commissioning Groups.

SOURCES OF DATA

Summary data from Cochrane systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Currently, the only treatment that offers significant and durable weight loss for those with severe and complex obesity is surgery. Three operations account for 95% of all bariatric surgery in the UK, but the NHS offers surgery to only a small fraction of those who could benefit. Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (gastric banding) has potentially the lowest risk and up-front costs of the three procedures.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Reliable Level 1 evidence of the relative effectiveness of the operations is lacking.

GROWING POINTS

As a point intervention, weight loss surgery together with the chronic disease management strategy for obesity can prevent significant future disease and mortality, and the NHS should embrace both.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

Better RCT evidence is needed including clinical effectiveness and economic analysis to answer the important question 'which is the best of the three operations most frequently performed?' This review considers the current evidence for gastric banding for the treatment of severe and complex obesity.

Long-Term Outcomes of Obesity Surgery and Implications for Health System Planning

Weight loss surgery is currently the only treatment that offers significant and sustained weight loss for those with severe and complex obesity. Obesity levels have reached a sustained high, whereby several percent of a country's population would qualify for surgery based upon current national guidelines. Worldwide, the provision of surgery is highly variable and to treat all the affected population, it would require at least a 100-fold increase in the provision of services. This has important cost and commissioning implications for health-care planners. Reliable level 1 evidence of the long-term effects of obesity surgery is still lacking, and the long-term complication profiles and re-operation rates unclear, which could have significant impact on health-care systems in the future. The chronic disease management of obesity in a population must be integrated with education and prevention and the brief intervention of weight loss surgery and the management of its sequelae, to prevent significant future morbidity and mortality.