1
|
van der Knaap-Kind LS, Ombashi S, Van Roey V, Kragt L, Peterson P, Jabbari F, Wolvius EB, Versnel SL. Evaluation and recommendations of the oral health, oral function, and orofacial aesthetics-related measures of the ICHOM Standard Set for Cleft Lip and Palate. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2024; 53:563-570. [PMID: 38228465 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2024.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2023] [Revised: 12/18/2023] [Accepted: 01/02/2024] [Indexed: 01/18/2024]
Abstract
This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of outcome measures for the orofacial domain included in the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Standard Set for Cleft Lip and Palate (ICHOM-SCS). In this multicentre study involving two cleft centres, suggestions to optimize the type and timing of outcome measures were made based on data and clinical experience. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) (CLEFT-Q Jaw, Teeth, Eating/Drinking; Child Oral Health Impact Profile-Oral Symptoms Scale (COHIP-OSS)) and clinical outcome measures (caries experience and dental occlusion) data were collected retrospectively for age 5, 8, 10, 12, 19, and 22 years. The data were categorized by cleft type and analysed within and between age groups using Spearman correlation, the distribution of responses per item, a two-sample test for equality of proportions, and effect plots. Most correlations between PROMs and clinical outcome measures were weak (r < 0.5), suggesting PROMs and clinical outcome measures complement each other. The COHIP-OSS and CLEFT-Q Eating/Drinking barely detected problems in any patient category and are no longer recommended. A suitable alternative appears complex to find; outcomes of this study and the recent literature doubt an added value. Similar problems were found in the CLEFT-Q Jaw at time-point 12 years. Therefore, time-points 15 and 17 years are currently suggested.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L S van der Knaap-Kind
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - S Ombashi
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; European Reference Network for Rare and/or Complex Craniofacial Anomalies and Ear, Nose And Throat Disorders, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - V Van Roey
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; European Reference Network for Rare and/or Complex Craniofacial Anomalies and Ear, Nose And Throat Disorders, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - L Kragt
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - P Peterson
- Department of Reconstructive Plastic Surgery, Stockholm Craniofacial Team, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - F Jabbari
- Department of Dental Medicine, Orthodontics and Paediatric Dentistry, Stockholm Craniofacial Team, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - E B Wolvius
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; European Reference Network for Rare and/or Complex Craniofacial Anomalies and Ear, Nose And Throat Disorders, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S L Versnel
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; European Reference Network for Rare and/or Complex Craniofacial Anomalies and Ear, Nose And Throat Disorders, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hummel K, Michelson A, Zmora R, de Ferranti S, Jenkins K, Saleeb SF. Implementation of the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement CHD standard set in patients undergoing pulmonary valve replacement. Cardiol Young 2024:1-6. [PMID: 38711375 DOI: 10.1017/s1047951124000866] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/08/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the burden of CHD, a high cost and utilization condition, an implementation of long-term outcome measures is lacking. The objective of this study is to pilot the implementation of the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement CHD standard set in patients undergoing pulmonary valve replacement, a procedure performed in mostly well patients with diverse CHD. METHODS Patients ≥ 8 years old undergoing catheterization-based pulmonary valve replacement were approached via various approaches for patient-reported outcomes, with a follow-up assessment at 3 months post-procedure. Implementation strategy analysis was performed via a hybrid type 2 design. RESULTS Of the 74 patients undergoing pulmonary valve replacement, 32 completed initial patient-reported outcomes with variable response rates by strategy (email and in-person explanation 100%, email only 54%, and email followed by text/call 64%). Ages ranged 8-67 years (mean 30). Pre-procedurally, 34% had symptomatic arrhythmias, which improved post-procedure. For those in school, 43% missed ≥ 6 days per year, and over half had work absenteeism. Financial concerns were reported in 34%. Patients reported high satisfaction with life (50% [n = 16]) and health-related quality of life (90% [n = 26]). Depression symptoms were reported in 84% (n = 27) and anxiety in 62.5% (n = 18), with tendency towards improvement post-procedurally. CONCLUSION Pilot implementation of the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement CHD standard set in pulmonary valve replacement patients reveals a significant burden of disease not previously reported. Barriers to the implementation include a sustainable, automated system for patient-reported outcome collection and infrastructure to assess in real time. This provides an example of implementing cardiac outcomes set in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin Hummel
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Ariane Michelson
- Department of Cardiology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Sarah de Ferranti
- Department of Cardiology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Kathy Jenkins
- Department of Cardiology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Susan F Saleeb
- Department of Cardiology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kavallieros K, Pope T, Tan M, Kaur H, Gianesini S, Lazarashvili Z, Jaworucka-Kaczorowska A, Narayanan S, Gwozdz AM, Davies AH. Identification of outcomes in clinical studies for pelvic venous disorders. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2024:101865. [PMID: 38452895 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2024.101865] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2023] [Revised: 01/19/2024] [Accepted: 02/17/2024] [Indexed: 03/09/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE There is increasing recognition that health systems need to measure and improve the value of patient care by measuring outcomes. Chronic pelvic pain secondary to pelvic venous insufficiency can have a significant impact on the quality of life (QOL) of women affected. Despite growing recognition, pelvic venous disorders (PeVDs), an important cause of chronic pelvic pain, remain underdiagnosed. Developing a core outcome set (COS) for benchmarking care delivery enhances the standardization of care. However, there is no consensus regarding a standardized minimum set of outcomes for PeVD. We aimed to generate a list of outcomes reported in previous PeVD treatment studies to lay the foundation for developing a COS for PeVD. METHODS This scoping review was undertaken according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Initially, screening, full-text review and extraction was conducted on studies published between 2018 and 2023. Subsequently, the search was expanded using 1-year intervals, until, over a 1-year interval, no new outcomes were recorded. Closely related outcomes were classified into domains, and domains into three core areas: disease-specific, treatment-related, and QOL-related outcomes. RESULTS Of the 1579 records identified, 51 publications were included. From these studies, 108 different outcomes were identified. The median number of outcomes per study was 8 (interquartile range, 6-13). Closely related outcomes were organized into 42 outcome domains, which were then categorized into 3 core outcome areas; 47.6% (20/42) were disease specific, 35.7% (15/42) treatment related, and 16.7% (7/42) were QOL related. Of the 51 included studies, disease-specific outcomes were identified in 96.1% of the studies (49/51), treatment-related outcomes in 94.1% (48/51), and QOL outcomes in only 13.7% (7/51). CONCLUSIONS There was significant heterogeneity in outcomes reported in PeVD studies. Most PeVD treatment studies evaluated disease-specific and treatment-related outcomes of PeVD, but few reported outcomes that measured the impact on QOL. These findings will inform the next steps in developing a COS for PeVD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Konstantinos Kavallieros
- Academic Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Tasneem Pope
- Academic Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Matthew Tan
- Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, London, UK
| | - Harmeena Kaur
- Academic Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Sergio Gianesini
- Department of Translational Medicine, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy; Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD
| | | | | | - Sriram Narayanan
- Venus Clinic and The Harley Street Heart and Vascular Centre, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Adam M Gwozdz
- Academic Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
| | - Alun H Davies
- Academic Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Slingerland SR, van de Kar MRD, van Steenbergen GJ, Schulz DN, Dekker L, van Veghel D. Measuring costs and outcomes: what are suitable models while implementing value-based healthcare in thoracic surgery? J Thorac Dis 2023; 15:6395-6402. [PMID: 38249893 PMCID: PMC10797363 DOI: 10.21037/jtd-23-1364] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2023] [Accepted: 11/15/2023] [Indexed: 01/23/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Stacey R. Slingerland
- Catharina Heart Centre, Research & Development Department, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Mileen R. D. van de Kar
- Catharina Heart Centre, Research & Development Department, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs J. van Steenbergen
- Catharina Heart Centre, Research & Development Department, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Daniela N. Schulz
- Catharina Heart Centre, Research & Development Department, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Lukas Dekker
- Catharina Heart Centre, Research & Development Department, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Technology, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Dennis van Veghel
- Catharina Heart Centre, Research & Development Department, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Terwee CB. Common measures or common metrics? the value of IRT-based common metrics. J Patient Rep Outcomes 2023; 7:117. [PMID: 37982948 PMCID: PMC10661660 DOI: 10.1186/s41687-023-00657-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2023] [Accepted: 11/13/2023] [Indexed: 11/21/2023] Open
Abstract
There is a clear need to harmonize outcome measurement. Some authors propose to express scores as T scores to facilitate interpretation of PROM results in clinical practice. While this is a step in the right direction, there are important limitations to the acceptance of the T score metric as a common metric when T scores are based on raw sum scores of ordinal items: Such T scores of different instruments are not exactly comparable because they are not interval scaled; T scores of different measures are only on the same scale if exactly the same reference group is used; and the T sore metric cannot be maintained because it is reference population-dependent and needs to be updated regularly. These limitations can be overcome by using an item response theory (IRT)-based metric. Items from different measures can be placed on the same IRT metric to make scores comparable on an interval scale. The PROMIS initiative used IRT to develop item banks for measuring various health outcomes. Other PROMs have been linked to the PROMIS metric. Although PROMIS uses a T-score metric for practical reasons, the underlying PROMIS metric is actually an IRT metric. An IRT approach also enables further development of an item bank while preserving the underlying metric. Therefore, IRT-based metrics should be considered as common metrics for the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caroline B Terwee
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
- Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Methodology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
van Kalsbeek RJ, Hudson MM, Mulder RL, Ehrhardt M, Green DM, Mulrooney DA, Hakkert J, den Hartogh J, Nijenhuis A, van Santen HM, Schouten-van Meeteren AYN, van Tinteren H, Verbruggen LC, Conklin HM, Jacola LM, Webster RT, Partanen M, Kollen WJW, Grootenhuis MA, Pieters R, Kremer LCM. A joint international consensus statement for measuring quality of survival for patients with childhood cancer. Nat Med 2023; 29:1340-1348. [PMID: 37322119 DOI: 10.1038/s41591-023-02339-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2023] [Accepted: 04/05/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
The aim of treating childhood cancer remains to cure all. As survival rates improve, long-term health outcomes increasingly define quality of care. The International Childhood Cancer Outcome Project developed a set of core outcomes for most types of childhood cancers involving relevant international stakeholders (survivors; pediatric oncologists; other medical, nursing or paramedical care providers; and psychosocial or neurocognitive care providers) to allow outcome-based evaluation of childhood cancer care. A survey among healthcare providers (n = 87) and online focus groups of survivors (n = 22) resulted in unique candidate outcome lists for 17 types of childhood cancer (five hematological malignancies, four central nervous system tumors and eight solid tumors). In a two-round Delphi survey, 435 healthcare providers from 68 institutions internationally (response rates for round 1, 70-97%; round 2, 65-92%) contributed to the selection of four to eight physical core outcomes (for example, heart failure, subfertility and subsequent neoplasms) and three aspects of quality of life (physical, psychosocial and neurocognitive) per pediatric cancer subtype. Measurement instruments for the core outcomes consist of medical record abstraction, questionnaires and linkage with existing registries. This International Childhood Cancer Core Outcome Set represents outcomes of value to patients, survivors and healthcare providers and can be used to measure institutional progress and benchmark against peers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Renée L Mulder
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Jessica Hakkert
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jaap den Hartogh
- Dutch Childhood Cancer Organization (Vereniging Kinderkanker Nederland), De Bilt, The Netherlands
| | - Anouk Nijenhuis
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Hanneke M van Santen
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
- Department of Pediatric Endocrinology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, Utrecht Medical Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Harm van Tinteren
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Lisa M Jacola
- St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | | | - Marita Partanen
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter J W Kollen
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Rob Pieters
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Leontien C M Kremer
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, the Netherlands
- Faculty of Medicine, Utrecht University and Utrecht Medical Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|