Are PROMs used adequately in sports research? An analysis of 54 randomized controlled trials with PROMs as endpoint

Transcultural adaptation and validation of the 4-Domain Sports PROM into Italian

OBJECTIVES

This work aims to evaluate and validate the process of cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the 4-Domain Sports PROM (4-DSP) into Italian, assessing its understandability and reproducibility in all questionnaire domains for Italian-speaking patients.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study, level of evidence II. The questionnaire was self-administered by 100 patients (80 males and 20 females) who had undergone anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and had a one-year minimum follow-up. The mean age and standard deviation (SD) was 31.20 ​± ​12.65 years. According to their level of sports participation, 51% were recreational, 31% were regional, 12% were national, and 6% were international athletes. All patients filled in the 4-DSP questionnaire without direct supervision of their trainer/coach or researcher. All data were collected and processed anonymously. The translation and cultural adaptation of the 4-DSP involved six phases: (1) translation, (2) synthesis, (3) back-translation, (4) pre-test, (5) expert committee review and (6) final version approval by the author of the original version for publication.

RESULTS

The cross-cultural validation of the questionnaire 4-DSP into Italian presented a global Cronbach's alpha of 0.65, Conceptual equivalence to translation and relevance were 99.09% and 99.81%, respectively, and the percentage of agreement was 99.09%.

CONCLUSION

The cross-culturally validated version of the 4-DSP into Italian proved to be adequately understandable and reproducible in all questionnaire domains and can be safely and reliably used in Italian-speaking patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Study level II.

"Bring Your Own Device"-A New Approach to Wearable Outcome Assessment in Trauma

Background and Objectives: Outcome data from wearable devices are increasingly used in both research and clinics. Traditionally, a dedicated device is chosen for a given study or clinical application to collect outcome data as soon as the patient is included in a study or undergoes a procedure. The current study introduces a new measurement strategy, whereby patients' own devices are utilized, allowing for both a pre-injury baseline measure and ability to show achievable results. Materials and Methods: Patients with a pre-existing musculoskeletal injury of the upper and lower extremity were included in this exploratory, proof-of-concept study. They were followed up for a minimum of 6 weeks after injury, and their wearable outcome data (from a smartphone and/or a body-worn sensor) were continuously acquired during this period. A descriptive analysis of the screening characteristics and the observed and achievable outcome patterns was performed. Results: A total of 432 patients was continuously screened for the study, and their screening was analyzed. The highest success rate for successful inclusion was in younger patients. Forty-eight patients were included in the analysis. The most prevalent outcome was step count. Three distinctive activity data patterns were observed: patients recovering, patients with slow or no recovery, and patients needing additional measures to determine treatment outcomes. Conclusions: Measuring outcomes in trauma patients with the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) strategy is feasible. With this approach, patients were able to provide continuous activity data without any dedicated equipment given to them. The measurement technique is especially suited to particular patient groups. Our study's screening log and inclusion characteristics can help inform future studies wishing to employ the BYOD design.

Patient-reported outcome measures as an outcome variable in sports medicine research

Injury prevention and rehabilitation research often address variables that would be considered clinician-oriented outcomes, such as strength, range of motion, laxity, and return-to-sport. While clinician-oriented variables are helpful in describing the physiological recovery from injury, they neglect the patient perspective and aspects of patient-centered care. Variables that capture patient perspective are essential when considering the impact of injury and recovery on the lives of patients. The inclusion of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as dependent variables in sports medicine research, including injury prevention and rehabilitation research, provides a unique perspective regarding the patient's perception of their health status, the effectiveness of treatments, and other information that the patient deems important to their care. Over the last 20 years, there has been a significant increase in the use of PROMs in sports medicine research. The growing body of work gives opportunity to reflect on what has been done and to provide some ideas of how to strengthen the evidence moving forward. This mini-review will discuss ideas for the inclusion of PROMs in sports medicine research, with a focus on critical factors, gaps, and future directions in this area of research. Important elements of research with PROMs, including instrument selection, administration, and interpretation, will be discussed and areas for improvement, consideration, and standardization will be provided.

High recall bias in retrospective assessment of the pediatric International Knee Documentation Committee Questionnaire (Pedi-IKDC) in children with knee pathologies

PURPOSE

The increasing incidence of knee injuries among children is well known by sports physicians. Papers dealing with this topic have often collected patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) in a retrospective manner; this limitation could lead to a misinterpretation of the results, because pediatric patients might not remember their preoperative conditions adequately. This study aims to evaluate the reliability and the reproducibility of the IKDC pediatric score when administered retrospectively at a 12-month follow-up.

METHODS

From September 2018 and June 2019, all patients aged 7-18 scheduled for surgery due to different knee pathologies in a single center were considered eligible. Parents were contacted by phone for consent. An open-source platform was implemented to collect the responses: two surveys were created (Q1, Q2). They included general information and the Pedi-IKDC score. Q1 was completed prospectively, while Q2 was completed 12 months after surgery. The two questionnaires were identical, and patients were carefully advised to complete Q2 recalling their health status before surgery. ICC and the concordance correlation coefficient (ρ_c) were used to assess the reproducibility between the prospective and recalled scores.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients responded to Q1 and Q2, and the mean age was 12.9 ± 2.2 years at Q1 and 14.1 ± 2.2 years at Q2. The mean time between Q1 and Q2 was 14.1 ± 2.1 months. Between prospective-IKDC and recall-IKDC, the ICC coefficient was "poor" at 0.32 (CI 0.09 to 0.5) and the ρ_c was "poor" at 0.4 (CI 0.29 to 0.51). Mean prospective-IKDC was 76.8 ± 23.52 mean recalled-IKDC was 60.4 ± 11.5 (P < 0.0001), while mean difference was -16.3 ± 2.09. Simple linear regression models showed that Δ-IKDC is independently associated with age at Q1 (R² = 0.2676; P0.0001)  and prospective-IKDC (R² = 0.653; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Retrospective collection of the Pedi-IKDC score is not reliable and has high recall bias. This should be avoided in children with knee conditions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Patient-reported outcome during radiotherapy for head and neck cancer: the use of different PRO questionnaires

PURPOSE

Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients are typically treated with radiotherapy (RT), which might lead to side effects and deterioration of quality of life (QoL). Studies in other cancers indicate that systematic use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) can be a tool to increase awareness of patients' symptoms and improve QoL. Multiple PRO questionnaires have been developed and validated for HNC, complicating the interpretation of results from scientific studies. In this exploratory study, symptom scores from four essential symptoms present in four different HNC-specific PRO questionnaires were evaluated.

METHODS

Four HNC-specific PRO questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-H&N35, FACT-H&N, MDASI-HN, and PRO-CTCAE) for patients undergoing radiotherapy were completed by eligible HNC patients up to ten times during and after RT. Four essential symptoms (pain, dysphagia, hoarseness, and dry mouth) were present in all questionnaires. The symptom scores for these symptoms were aligned and evaluated.

RESULTS

Twelve patients were included and completed a total of 328 PRO questionnaires out of 420. Similarity between symptom score for the four symptoms was found, when the symptom scores were aligned. The symptom scores increased during RT and decreased afterwards for all four symptoms and in all four questionnaires.

CONCLUSION

Four HNC-specific PRO questionnaires are found similar in reflecting symptom scores over time concerning four important HNC symptoms (pain, dysphagia, hoarseness, and dry mouth). PRO can contribute with targetable information about symptoms, and PRO questionnaires might be a valuable add on to clinical practice enabling a varied picture of patients' symptoms during radiotherapy.

A catalogue of PROMs in sports science: Quality assessment of PROM development and validation

Choosing the most adequate PROM for a study is a non-trivial process. The aim of this study was to provide a catalogue with analyses of content and construct validity of PROMs relevant to research in sports science, including all published local translations. The most commonly used PROMs in sports research were selected from a PubMed search "patient reported outcome measures sports", identifying 439 articles and 194 different PROMs. Articles describing development of the 61 selected PROMs were assessed for content validity, and all articles regarding construct validity of each PROM and all published translations (in total 622 articles) were analyzed. A catalogue with assessments of the 61 PROMs was produced. The majority were of inferior validity, with few exceptions. The most common reason for this was that the PROM had not been developed by methods that ensure high content validity. Another major reason for inferior validity was that construct validity had not been secured by adequate statistical methods. In conclusion, this catalogue provides a tool for researchers to facilitate choosing the most valid PROM for studies in sports research. Furthermore, it shows for popular PROMs where further validation is needed, and for fields in musculoskeletal medicine where valid PROMs are lacking. It is suggested that a targeted effort is made to develop valid PROMs for major conditions in musculoskeletal research. The current method is easier to practice compared with assessment after COSMIN guidelines.