The COMET Handbook: version 1.0

Achieving consensus on assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in people with cognitive impairments (CI)a Delphi study

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of impairments of cognitive functions is expected to increase. Enhancing the QoL of those affected is important. HRQoL in people with CI can be assessed by self-report, proxy-report or observation but there is uncertainty how to best assess HRQoL in people with CI, and which assessment method is most appropriate. Therefore the aim of our study was to use Delphi methodology in order to achieve consensus on how HRQoL should be assessed in people with CI and which content domains should be assessed.

METHODS

The Delphi process consisted of three online survey rounds and a concluding consensus conference. Participants were experts as well as individuals and relatives of people affected by CI. The Delphi survey was developed based on existing literature and included 55 statements at the first round. Consensus was considered to be achieved when a minimum of 75 % of responses fell into the categories 6 (agree) and 7 (strongly agree) (positive consensus) or in categories 1 (strongly disagree) and 2 (disagree) (negative consensus).

RESULTS

Consensus was reached for a total of 41 of 56 statements/substatements. In the 1st survey round 102 experts and 11 relatives participated. In the 2nd survey round 68 experts and 11 relatives continued to participate. In the 3rd survey round 41 experts and 9 relatives participated. In the consensus conference 17 experts and 4 relatives of individuals with CI and in the second one-hour online conference session 14 experts and 2 relatives of individuals with CI participated.

CONCLUSION

The combination of the three assessment methods self-report, proxy-report and observation across all stages of CI is the preferred method and should be used whenever possible. As domains Physical capacity, Psychological, Level of Independence, Social Relationships, Environment and Spirituality/Relogion/Personal Beliefs should be assessed.

Exploring the heterogeneity in community pharmacist-led medication review studies - A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Findings on the effectiveness of medication reviews led by community pharmacists (CPs) are often inconclusive. It has been hypothesized that studies are not sufficiently standardized, and thus, it is difficult to draw conclusions.

OBJECTIVE(S)

To examine differences in the way CP-led medication review studies are set up. This was accomplished by investigating (1) patient selection criteria, (2) components of the medication review interventions, (3) types of outcomes, and (4) measurement instruments used.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials of CP-led medication reviews was carried out in PubMed and Cochrane Library. Information on patient selection, intervention components, and outcome measurements was extracted, and frequencies were analyzed. Where possible, outcomes were mapped to the Core Outcome Set (COS) for medication review studies. Finally, a network analysis was conducted to explore the influence of individual factors on outcome effects.

RESULTS

In total, 30 articles (26 studies) were included. Most articles had a drug class-specific or disease-specific patient selection criterion (n = 19). Half of the articles included patients aged ≥60 years (n = 15), and in 40% (n = 12/30) patients taking 4 drugs or more. In 24 of 30 articles, a medication review was comprised with additional interventions, such as distribution of educational material and training or follow-up visits. About 40 different outcomes were extracted. Within specific outcomes, the measurement instruments varied, and COS was rarely represented.

CONCLUSION

The revealed differences in patient selection, intervention delivery, and outcome assessment highlight the need for more standardization in research on CP-led medication reviews. While intervention delivery should be more precisely described to capture potential differences between interventions, outcome assessment should be standardized in terms of outcome selection by application of the COS, and with regard to the selected core outcome measurement instruments to enable comparison of the results.

Concerns beyond ankle symptoms predominate healthcare professionals' views of patients with ankle osteoarthritis: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Explore healthcare professionals' perspectives on the main problems that their patients with ankle osteoarthritis experience and to propose health-related domains.

METHODS

A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was conducted with an international multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals identified as ankle experts. Eligibility criteria were aged ≥18 years, and a certified healthcare professional with ≥ 5-year experience post-qualification in working with ankle osteoarthritis and/or chronic ankle pain. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one healthcare professionals (20 males; mean (range) age 49 (34-72) years) from four professions (orthopaedic surgeons (n = 9), athletic trainers (n = 5), physiotherapists (n = 4) and podiatrists (n = 3)) were interviewed. Four main themes were identified: 1) people with ankle osteoarthritis have difficulty with weight-bearing activities; 2) symptoms of pain and stiffness predominate, alongside swelling, instability, weakness and poor balance; 3) chronic pain in ankle osteoarthritis has psychosocial consequences; and 4) the loss of activities of daily living and independence compromises quality of life. We proposed 15 health-related domains that emerge from the interview data.

CONCLUSION

Healthcare professionals recognise that ankle osteoarthritis patients have difficulty in physical, sporting, and occupational weight-bearing activities, and they live with persistent ankle pain, stiffness and other symptoms that have physical and psychosocial consequences. The health-related domains derived from interviews with expert healthcare professionals will contribute to the development of a core domain set for ankle osteoarthritis.

Music-Based Interventions for Symptom Management in Critically Ill, Mechanically Ventilated Adults: A Scoping Review of the Literature

Background: Patients in intensive care units experience high symptom burden during mechanical ventilation (MV). Pharmacologic symptom management is associated with side effects and increased morbidity. Music-based interventions (MBIs) have been associated with reductions in both anxiety in MV adults and pain for critically ill adults, yet their use for the management of other burdensome symptoms has not been evaluated. The purpose of this scoping review is to map the state of evidence for the use of prerecorded music listening MBIs for symptom management in MV adults. Methods: A systematic search of the literature was conducted across four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science) for experimental designed studies that measured the efficacy of MBIs for the management of physical and psychological symptoms including anxiety, sedation/agitation, dyspnea, distress, delirium, sleep, stress, fear, loneliness, or depression in critically ill, MV adults between January 1, 1998, and April 18, 2023. Results: A total of 643 abstracts and 29 clinical trials were included. Overall, the risk of bias, assessed using the Evidence Project tool, was moderate. MBIs were mostly delivered with headphones using music selected either by investigators or from a limited selection. MBIs were associated with reduced pain, agitation, dyspnea, distress and anxiety, and improved tolerance of MV and sedative weaning. Outcomes of delirium were mixed. No studies explored sleep disturbances, fear, or loneliness. Conclusions: Use of MBIs improved symptom experience for critically ill adults during MV. Future studies employing unrestricted patient-preferred music selections and exploring outcomes of sleep quality, psychological distress, and delirium are needed in this highly symptomatic patient population.

Selection of outcome measurement instruments for a core outcome set for trials aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care: a Delphi consensus study

BACKGROUND

Despite developing a polypharmacy core outcome set (COS) in primary care, it is not clear how these outcomes should be measured.

AIM

To select outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) for a COS targeting appropriate polypharmacy in older patients in primary care.

METHOD

Following the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guideline, OMIs were identified from a Cochrane review focusing on appropriate polypharmacy. The quality of OMIs was assessed using a published checklist. Subsequently, two rounds of Delphi questionnaires were conducted via the SoGoSurvey® platform, engaging stakeholders (researchers, clinicians and journal editors specialising in geriatric primary care) to achieve consensus on OMIs using a scale encompassing "agree", "disagree", or "unsure". Consensus was achieved if 70% or more participants chose "agree" and 15% or fewer chose "disagree."

RESULTS

The quality of 20 OMIs identified from the Cochrane review was evaluated. Seven OMIs were selected based on meeting the COSMIN guideline's minimum requirements. Out of 188 potential participants, 57 (30.3%) consented to participate. Rounds 1 and 2 of Delphi exercises were completed by 50 respondents, achieving agreement on three OMIs: 'number of serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs)' (98%), 'number of deaths' (76%), and 'number of patients who fell' (70%) for measuring 'serious ADRs,' 'mortality,' and 'falls,' respectively. No agreement was reached for 'medication appropriateness,' 'medication side-effects,' 'quality of life,' and 'medication regimen complexity.'

CONCLUSION

OMIs were selected for a limited number of outcomes in the polypharmacy COS. Future research should identify suitable OMIs for the remaining four outcomes.

Exploring locoregional treatment reporting in neoadjuvant systemic breast cancer treatment studies: A systematic review

Accurate information about locoregional treatments in breast cancer neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) trials is vital to support surgical decision-making and allow meaningful interpretation of long-term oncological outcomes. This systematic review (PROSPERO registration CRD42023470891) aimed to describe the current practice of outcome reporting in NST studies. A systematic search identified primary research studies published 01/01/2018-08/09/2023 reporting outcomes in patients receiving NST for breast cancer followed by locoregional treatment. Included were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (NRS) with >250 participants reporting at least one locoregional treatment outcome. Outcomes were extracted verbatim and categorised using content analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise results. Of the 3111 abstracts screened, 137 studies (22 RCTs and 115 NRS) reporting at least one locoregional outcome in 575,531 patients were included. The 137 studies reported a total of 510 surgical outcomes with a median of 3 (range 1-12) per study. No single outcome was reported in all studies. Type of breast (n = 129, 94.2 %) and axillary (n = 86, 62.8 %) surgery were reported most frequently. Only 34 % (n = 47) studies reported how treatment response was assessed and if/how this informed surgical decision-making. Only a fifth (n = 28) reported outcomes relating to surgical de-escalation. Only 72 studies (52.6 %) reported any radiation therapy (RT)-related outcome, most frequently whether RT had been received (n = 63/72, 87.5 %). Current reporting of locoregional treatment outcomes in NST studies is poor, inconsistent and urgently needs to be improved. A core outcome set and reporting guidelines may improve the quality and value of future research.

Development of a core domain set for ankle osteoarthritis: An international consensus study of patients and health professionals

OBJECTIVES

To develop an internationally agreed-upon core domain set for ankle osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

In a three-part Delphi process, a group of multidisciplinary health professionals with expertise in ankle OA and people with ankle OA responded to online questionnaires. The questionnaires proposed a list of 29 candidate domains derived from a systematic review of ankle OA research, and interviews with people with ankle OA and health professionals. Consensus was defined a priori as ≥70% agreement in people with ankle OA and health professionals whether a domain should or should not be included in a core domain set.

RESULTS

A total of 100 people (75 health professionals and 25 people with ankle OA) from 18 countries (4 continents) participated in this study. Five domains reached consensus for inclusion in a core domain set for ankle OA - pain severity, health-related quality of life, function, disability and ankle range of motion. Twenty-one candidate domains reached agreement not to be included in the core domain set, and three domains remained undecided (ankle instability, physical capacity, and mental health).

CONCLUSION

This international consensus study, which included people with ankle OA and health professionals, has established a core domain set for ankle OA with five domains that should be measured and reported in all ankle OA trials - pain severity, health-related quality of life, function, disability and ankle range of motion. This core domain set will guide the reporting of outcomes in clinical trials on ankle OA. Future research should determine which outcome measurement instruments should be used to measure each of the core domains.

What to Measure in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Haemorrhage Research-An International Delphi Survey

Aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH) is a devastating condition with high mortality and morbidity. The outcome measures used in aSAH clinical research vary making it challenging to compare and combine different studies. Additionally, there may be a mismatch between the outcomes prioritized by patients, caregivers, and health care providers and those selected by researchers. We conducted an international, online, multiple round Delphi study to develop consensus on domains (where a domain is a health concept or aspect) prioritized by key stakeholders including those with lived experience of aSAH, health care providers, and researchers, funders, or industry professionals. One hundred seventy-five people participated in the survey, 59% of whom had lived experience of aSAH. Over three rounds, 32 domains reached the consensus threshold pre-defined as 70% of participants rating the domain as being critically important. During the fourth round, participants ranked the importance of each of these 32 domains. The top ten domains ranked highest to lowest were (1) Cognition and executive function, (2) Aneurysm obliteration, (3) Cerebral infarction, (4) Functional outcomes including ability to walk, (5) Delayed cerebral ischemia, (6) The overall quality of life as reported by the SAH survivor, (7) Changes to emotions or mood (including depression), (8) The basic activities of daily living, (9) Vasospasm, and (10) ICU complications. Our findings confirm that there is a mismatch between domains prioritized by stakeholders and outcomes used in clinical research. Our future work aims to address this mismatch through the development of a core outcome set in aSAH research.

Outcomes of prognostication in people living with advanced cancer: A qualitative study to inform a Core Outcome Set

BACKGROUND

Studies of prognostication in advanced cancer use a wide range of outcomes and outcome measures, making it difficult to compare these studies and their findings. Core Outcome Sets facilitate comparability and standardisation between studies and would benefit future prognostic research. This qualitative study, the second step in a wider study developing such a Core Outcome Set, aimed to explore the perceptions and experiences of patients with advanced cancer, informal caregivers, and clinicians regarding the potential outcomes to assess the impact of prognostication.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients living with advanced cancer (n = 8), informal caregivers (n = 10), and clinicians (n = 10) recruited from palliative care services across three sites in London, United Kingdom. Interviews were conducted in-person, via telephone, or video conferencing, and were audio-recorded. Data were analysed using framework analysis. Findings were compared with outcomes identified in a previously published systematic review.

RESULTS

We identified 33 outcomes, 16 of which were not previously reported in the literature. We grouped these outcomes into 10 domains, nine from the COMET taxonomy, plus a tenth domain (spiritual/religious/existential functioning/wellbeing) which we added further to the previous systematic review. These findings highlighted discrepancies between the priorities of existing research and those of stakeholders. Novel outcomes highlight the more personal and emotional impacts of prognostication, whilst other outcomes confirm the relevance of survival length, depression, anxiety, pain, hope dynamics, emotional distress, and the quality of patient-clinician relationships for assessing the impact of prognostication.

CONCLUSIONS

This study offers valuable insights into outcomes which matter to key stakeholders, particularly patients and informal caregivers, highlights discrepancies between their priorities and those identified in previous studies, and underscores the need for a patient-centred approach in research and clinical practice in prognostication in advanced cancer. This work will contribute to developing a Core Outcome Set for assessing the impact of prognostication in advanced cancer.

A systematic literature review on patient-reported outcome domains and measures in nonsurgical efficacy trials related to chronic pain associated with endometriosis: an urgent call to action

ABSTRACT

Endometriosis, a common cause for chronic pelvic pain, significantly affects quality of life, fertility, and overall productivity of those affected. Therapeutic options remain limited, and collating evidence on treatment efficacy is complicated. One reason could be the heterogeneity of assessed outcomes in nonsurgical clinical trials, impeding meaningful result comparisons. This systematic literature review examines outcome domains and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in clinical trials. Through comprehensive search of Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL up until July 2022, we screened 1286 records, of which 191 were included in our analyses. Methodological quality (GRADE criteria), information about publication, patient population, and intervention were assessed, and domains as well as PROMs were extracted and analyzed. In accordance with IMMPACT domain framework, the domain pain was assessed in almost all studies (98.4%), followed by adverse events (73.8%). By contrast, assessment of physical functioning (29.8%), improvement and satisfaction (14.1%), and emotional functioning (6.8%) occurred less frequently. Studies of a better methodological quality tended to use more different domains. Nevertheless, combinations of more than 2 domains were rare, failing to comprehensively capture the bio-psycho-social aspects of endometriosis-associated pain. The PROMs used showed an even broader heterogeneity across all studies. Our findings underscore the large heterogeneity of assessed domains and PROMs in clinical pain-related endometriosis trials. This highlights the urgent need for a standardized approach to both, assessed domains and high-quality PROMs ideally realized through development and implementation of a core outcome set, encompassing the most pivotal domains and PROMs for both, stakeholders and patients.

Developments in the Design, Conduct, and Reporting of Child Health Trials

To identify priority areas to improve the design, conduct, and reporting of pediatric clinical trials, the international expert network, Standards for Research (StaR) in Child Health, was assembled and published the first 6 Standards in Pediatrics in 2012. After a recent review summarizing the 247 publications by StaR Child Health authors that highlight research practices that add value and reduce research "waste," the current review assesses the progress in key child health trial methods areas: consent and recruitment, containing risk of bias, roles of data monitoring committees, appropriate sample size calculations, outcome selection and measurement, and age groups for pediatric trials. Although meaningful change has occurred within the child health research ecosystem, measurable progress is still disappointingly slow. In this context, we identify and review emerging trends that will advance the agenda of increased clinical usefulness of pediatric trials, including patient and public engagement, Bayesian statistical approaches, adaptive designs, and platform trials. We explore how implementation science approaches could be applied to effect measurable improvements in the design, conducted, and reporting of child health research.

Synthesis of temporomandibular disorders management intervention outcomes for development of core outcome sets: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The selection of appropriate outcomes in clinical trials and systematic reviews is a crucial factor in determining the results that are useful, reliable, and relevant for both patients and healthcare professionals. Clinicians and researchers have been encouraged to develop and apply core outcome sets (COS) to minimise the discrepancy between studies.

AIM

This systematic review is the first phase of the COS development project for clinical trials in temporomandibular disorders (COS-TMD). It aims to identify and synthesise the outcomes used in the randomised controlled trials (RCT) that evaluated the effectiveness of interventions used in TMD management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was performed in several databases: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and EMBASE. The eligibility criteria comprised RCT that applied any intervention to treat temporomandibular joint disorders or masticatory muscle disorders. The identified outcomes were categorised according to domains of the Initiative on Methods, Measurement and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT).

RESULTS

The electronic search resulted in 1606 studies. After removing duplicates and applying the eligibility criteria, 106 RCT were included. A total of 43 studies evaluated masticatory muscle disorders, 27 evaluated temporomandibular joint disorders, and 36 analysed mixed TMD.

CONCLUSIONS

The evaluation showed significant variability in the types of outcomes and their measurement instruments. In addition, some domains such as physical and emotional functioning, participant ratings of global improvement and adverse events have been neglected when determining the effectiveness of treatments for TMD.

Women- and clinician- important outcomes and priorities regarding vasa praevia: An international qualitative study to inform development of a core outcome set

BACKGROUND

Many studies have reported interventions for women with vasa praevia to improve perinatal outcomes. However, which outcomes are important for women remains unclear.

AIM

To explore what outcomes are important for women with lived experience of vasa praevia and why, in order to inform the development of a core outcome set for studies on vasa praevia.

METHODS

An international qualitative study was conducted with women and clinicians. Semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed taking an inductive approach.

FINDINGS

Eighteen women and six clinicians (four obstetricians, two midwives) from the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia were interviewed. Participants identified 47 patient-important outcomes and experience measures, which were grouped under five themes: baby's survival and health, mother's physical health, mother's mental and emotional health, quality of health care delivery, and resource use and cost. While survival of the baby without short- and long-term morbidity remained the main priority, other important considerations included the physical, mental, social and financial wellbeing of families, future access to antenatal screening and diagnosis, information on management options and consequences, continuity of care, clear and effective communication, peer support and the appreciation of individual variations to risk tolerance, values and resource availability.

CONCLUSION

We have identified patient-important outcomes and experience measures that have been directly fed into the development of a core outcome set on vasa previa. Incorporating these considerations into both clinical practice and future research studies has the potential to improve outcomes and experiences for women with vasa praevia.

The Modern Slavery Core Outcome Set: A Survivor-Driven Consensus on Priority Outcomes for Recovery, Wellbeing, and Reintegration

There is no consensus on the outcomes needed for the recovery and reintegration of survivors of modern slavery and human trafficking. We developed the Modern Slavery Core Outcome Set (MSCOS) to address this gap. We conducted three English-language reviews on the intervention outcomes sought or experienced by adult survivors: a qualitative systematic review (4 databases, 18 eligible papers, thematic analysis), a rapid review of quantitative intervention studies (four databases, eight eligible papers, content analysis) and a gray literature review (2 databases, 21 websites, a call for evidence, 13 eligible papers, content analysis). We further extracted outcomes from 36 pre-existing interview transcripts with survivors, and seven interviews with survivors from underrepresented groups. We narrowed down outcomes via a consensus process involving: a three-stage E-Delphi survey (191 respondents); and a final consensus workshop (46 participants). We generated 398 outcomes from our 3 reviews, and 843 outcomes from interviews. By removing conceptual and literal duplicates, we reduced this to a longlist of 72 outcomes spanning 10 different domains. The E-Delphi produced a 14-outcome shortlist for the consensus workshop, where 7 final outcomes were chosen. Final outcomes were: "long-term consistent support," "secure and suitable housing," "safety from any trafficker or other abuser," "access to medical treatment," "finding purpose in life and self-actualisation," "access to education," and "compassionate, trauma-informed services." The MSCOS provides outcomes that are accepted by a wide range of stakeholders and that should be measured in intervention evaluation.

Developing a core outcome set for evaluating medication adherence interventions for adults prescribed long-term medication in primary care

BACKGROUND

Approximately half of people prescribed medications do not take them as prescribed. There is a significant unmet need regarding the barriers to medication adherence not being addressed in primary care. There is no agreement on which outcomes should be measured and reported in trials of medication adherence interventions.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a core outcome set (COS) for trials of medication adherence interventions in primary care for adults prescribed medications for long-term health conditions.

METHODS

A list of potentially relevant outcomes from the literature was developed. Using a two-round Delphi survey of stakeholder groups representing patients and their carers; primary care staff; and academic researchers with an interest in medication adherence; each outcome was scored in terms of importance for determining the effectiveness of medication adherence interventions in primary care. This was followed by two consensus workshops, where importance, as well as feasibility and acceptability of measurement, were considered in order to finalise the COS.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty people took part in Delphi Round 1 and 101 took part in Round 2. Eight people attended the workshops (four attendees per workshop). Seven outcomes were identified as most important, feasible and acceptable to collect in medication adherence trials: Health-related quality of life, number of doses taken, persistence with medicines, starting (initiating) a medicine, relevance of the medication adherence intervention for an individual, mortality, and adverse medicine events.

CONCLUSIONS

This COS represents the minimum outcomes that should be collected and reported in all medication adherence trials undertaken in primary care. When developing and finalizing the COS, feasibility and acceptability of collection of outcomes has been considered. In addition to the COS, medication adherence trials can choose to include outcomes to suit their specific context such as the health condition associated with their medication adherence intervention.

Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for clinical trials in primary sclerosing cholangitis

BACKGROUND

Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a progressive immune-mediated liver disease, for which no medical therapy has been shown to slow disease progression. However, the horizon for new therapies is encouraging, with several innovative clinical trials in progress. Despite these advancements, there is considerable heterogeneity in the outcomes studied, with lack of consensus as to what outcomes to measure, when to measure and how to measure. Furthermore, there has been a paradigm shift in PSC treatment targets over recent years, moving from biochemistry-based endpoints to histological assessment of liver fibrosis, imaging-based biomarkers and patient-reported outcome measures. The abundance of new interventional trials and evolving endpoints pose opportunities for all stakeholders involved in evaluating novel therapies. To this effect, there is a need to harmonise measures used in clinical trials through the development of a core outcome set (COS).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Synthesis of a PSC-specific COS will be conducted in four stages. Initially, a systematic literature review will be performed to identify outcomes previously used in PSC trials, followed by semistructured qualitative interviews conducted with key stakeholders. The latter may include patients, clinicians, researchers, pharmaceutical industry representatives and healthcare payers and regulatory agencies, to identify additional outcomes of importance. Using the outcomes generated from the literature review and stakeholder interviews, an international two-round Delphi survey will be conducted to prioritise outcomes for inclusion in the COS. Finally, a consensus meeting will be convened to ratify the COS and disseminate findings for application in future PSC trials.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been granted by the East Midlands-Leicester Central Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 24/EM/0126) for this study. The COS from this study will be widely disseminated including publication in peer-reviewed journals, international conferences, promotion through patient-support groups and made available on the Core Outcomes Measurement in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

1239.

Toward a core outcome set for faecal incontinence-A systematic review of outcomes reported in the literature

AIM

Faecal incontinence (FI) is a prevalent issue which can have a detrimental impact on the patient's quality of life. Current international guidelines lack strong treatment recommendations due to few studies in the field, in combination with the heterogeneity in outcome reporting. To address this, a core outcome set (COS) is proposed to standardize outcome reporting in FI studies, facilitating meta-analyses and enhancing therapeutic recommendations. Through several steps outlined by COMET 'what' to measure will be determined prior to determining 'how' to measure these outcomes. This systematic review aims to identify 'what' outcomes have been used in FI intervention studies so far in adult patients as a starting phase for the development of a future COS for FI.

METHOD

Medline, Embase and the Cochrane library were searched to identify all outcomes reported in comparative effectiveness trials assessing one or more treatment option in adult patients suffering from FI. The outcomes were categorized according to the Core Outcome Measurement in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy to standardize outcome terminology, assess completeness, and inform subsequent steps in COS development.

RESULTS

A total of 109 studies were included, which revealed 51 unique outcomes classified into 38 domains within four core areas. On average four outcomes were reported per study (range 1-11). The most commonly reported outcomes were "severity of FI" (83%), "quality of life" (64%), "number of FI episodes" (40%), "anorectal motor function" (39%), and "frequency of bowel movements" (16%).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review offers an overview of outcomes reported in FI studies, highlighting the heterogeneity between studies. This heterogeneity emphasizes the need for standardizing outcome reporting which can be established through the creation of a COS.

A review of core outcome sets (COS) developed for different settings finds there is a subset of outcomes relevant for both research and routine care

OBJECTIVES

To compare the outcomes selected for the same condition in core outcome sets (COSs) for research with those in COS for the routine care setting.

METHODS

A sample of COS was created from the most frequent five health areas within previous systematic reviews of COS for research and COS for routine care. Outcomes were extracted and categorized using an outcome taxonomy. Frequency of outcome domains included within COS were analyzed in subgroups according to research or care setting, patient involvement in COS development and health area. Matched sets of COS were created, where at least one research COS and one routine care COS exist for the same health condition, to identify the outcomes that were recommended for both settings. A similar process was used for a subset of paired COS matched in scope for both intervention and population as well as health condition.

RESULTS

The sample of COS comprised: 246 COS for research only, 76 COS for routine care only and 55 COS for both research and routine care. Across the 18 sets matched by health condition the median number (range) of outcomes included in both research COS and routine care COS was 6 (3-15), with differences noted across health areas. For the 11 paired COS matched by scope and health condition, the corresponding figures were 2 (2-8). Across all settings, COS that did not include patients as participants were less likely to include life impact outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Within a given health condition, a small number of core outcomes were found to be relevant for both research and care, offering a meaningful starting point for linking research and real-world evaluation.

Experiences of core outcome set developers on including stakeholders from low- and middle-income countries: An online survey

Core outcome set (COS) development and use enhances comparability of research findings. It may also enhance the translation of research into practice and reduce research waste. However, there is limited involvement of stakeholders from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in COS development and use. In this study, we explored the experiences of researchers in COS development projects who included stakeholders from LMICs. Online survey conducted in English of 70 COS developers from HICs who had included LMIC stakeholders in the process of developing a COS, published before the end of 2019. Respondents were identified from the COMET database and sent a link to the survey via a personalised email. Quantitative data were analysed using simple descriptive statistics. Qualitative data analysis was based on qualitative content analysis. There were 37 respondents yielding a 53% overall response rate. Analysis was limited to the responses related to 29 COS developed in the years 2015 to 2019, to reduce the potential for recall bias for earlier COS. Most respondents 20/29 (69%) were researchers. Determining 'what to measure' was reported as the most common stage of inclusion of LMIC stakeholders. Respondents cited (24/29, 83%) their ongoing collaborations with LMIC stakeholders such as clinicians or researchers as their main rationale for including LMICs stakeholders and reported that translation of the Delphi into languages other than English may be useful to enhance wider stakeholder participation. Involvement of LMIC stakeholders only in the later stages of COS development, lack of adequate resources to support their involvement, and lack of networks and contacts were thought to limit fuller participation of stakeholders from LMICs. To improve the involvement of LMIC stakeholders in COS development and use, COS developers need to raise awareness on the utility of COS. The need for and feasibility of translation into multiple languages warrants further discussion.

A Core Outcome Set for Research Evaluating Interventions to Enable Communication in Patients With an Artificial Airway: An International Delphi Consensus Study (Comm-COS)

OBJECTIVES

Critically ill adults requiring artificial airways experience profound communication deficits. Studies of interventions supporting communication report disparate outcomes, creating subsequent challenges in the interpretation of their effectiveness. Therefore, we aimed to develop international consensus for a communication core outcome set (Comm-COS) for future trials of communication interventions in this population.

DESIGN

1) Systematic review, 2) patient/family interviews, 3) two-round modified Delphi, and 4) virtual consensus meetings with a final voting round. A multidisciplinary expert steering committee oversaw all stages.

SETTING

Interviews and consensus meetings were conducted via videoconferencing. Digital methods were used for Delphi and final Comm-COS voting.

SUBJECTS

Three stakeholder groups: 1) patient and family members with lived experience within 3 years, 2) clinicians with experience working in critical care, and 3) researchers publishing in the field.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We identified 59 outcomes via our systematic review, 3 unique outcomes from qualitative interviews, and 2 outcomes from our steering committee. Following item reduction, 32 outcomes were presented in Delphi round 1; 134 participants voted; 15 patient/family (11%), 91 clinicians (68%), and 28 researchers (21%). Nine additional outcomes were generated and added to round 2; 106 (81%) participants voted. Following completion of the consensus processes, the Comm-COS includes seven outcomes: 1) changes in emotions and wellbeing associated with ability to communicate, 2) physical impact of communication aid use, 3) time to functional communication, 4) ability to communicate healthcare needs (comfort/care/safety/decisions), 5) conversation agency, 6) ability to establish a communication connection to develop and maintain relationships, and 7) acceptability of the communication intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first COS to specifically focus on communication for critically ill adults. Limitations for operationalization include selection of measures to use with these outcomes. Identification of suitable measures and adoption of the Comm-COS in future trials will help establish effective interventions to ameliorate the highly prevalent and negative experience of communicative incapacity.

Development of a set of measurable outcome indicators for Flemish patients with inflammatory bowel disease

OBJECTIVE

Uniform and standardised quality measurement allows care assessment and improvement. Following a pragmatic consensus method we aimed to agree on a selection of measurable quality indicators that can be used to assess, benchmark and gradually improve inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) care in Flanders.

METHODS

Of 49 structures, 135 processes and 37 outcome indicators identified through literature, 58 were preselected and reformulated into measurable outcome indicators by four IBD physicians. A larger expert group scored the 58 indicators on a 10-point importance scale twice, endorsed by patient and expert perspectives in between rounds. Additional items could be suggested. A final selection and subset of indicators with room for improvement were agreed upon during a consensus meeting.

RESULTS

Fifty indicators received an importance score of 7 or higher by ≥80% of the participants (seven IBD nurses, one abdominal surgeon, one chief medical officer and 31 IBD physicians including two paediatricians). Eight indicators scored highly important by 60-80%, two indicators reintroduced by patients and one newly suggested, were discussed during the consensus meeting. Among 26 participants, eight indicators were agreed to be added to the final selection. Of the 58 selected items, 19 were retained in the improvement subset, related to patient-reported outcomes, use of hospital services and survival, patient characteristics, monitoring of disease activity and remission, endoscopy guidelines, infection prevention, steroid and other medication use.

CONCLUSION

Fifty-eight indicators were selected to assess IBD care in Flanders and a subset of 19 for use in clinical practice to steer quality improvement initiatives.

Towards a roadmap for COSEB: the next steps in harmonization of outcomes for epidermolysis bullosa

The COSEB initiative aims for standardized and uniform measurement by developing core outcome sets for epidermolysis bullosa. This report describes the COSEB workshop organized in December 2023, which led to a broad stakeholder consensus-based roadmap. Moreover, it highlights novel features of COSEB, including the pro-active engagement of stakeholders from the very beginning and the appointment of a multi-stakeholder advisory panel.

The effectiveness of social prescribing in the management of long-term conditions in community-based adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of social prescribing interventions in the management of long-term conditions in adults.

DATA SOURCES

Eleven electronic databases were searched for randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials.

REVIEW METHODS

Outcomes of interest were quality of life, physical activity, psychological well-being and disease-specific measures. Bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. A narrative synthesis and meta-analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (n = 3566) were included in this review. Social prescribing interventions were heterogeneous and the most common risks of bias were poor blinding and high attrition. Social prescribing interventions designed to target specific long-term conditions i.e., cancer and diabetes demonstrated significant improvements in quality of life (n = 2 studies) and disease-specific psychological outcomes respectively (n = 3 studies). There was some evidence for improvement in physical activity (n = 2 studies) but most changes were within group only (n = 4 studies). Social prescribing interventions did not demonstrate any significant changes in general psychological well-being.

CONCLUSION

Social prescribing interventions demonstrated some improvements across a range of outcomes although the quality of evidence remains poor.

Development of a core outcome set for cardiac rehabilitation in patients with myocardial infarction: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Heterogeneous outcome reporting is common in clinical trials focused on cardiac rehabilitation for myocardial infarction (MI); this practice often results in the exclusion of data from clinical trials in systematic reviews. Developing a core outcome set (COS) may solve this problem.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will first identify a preliminary list of outcomes through a systematic review. Next, we will conduct semistructured interviews with patients to explore additional potential outcomes deemed important by patients. Then, we will engage various stakeholders such as clinicians, researchers and methodologists in two Delphi survey tends to refine and prioritise the identified outcomes. Subsequently, we will gather insights directly from patients with MI by administering plain language patient surveys; patients will be involved in questionnaire development. Finally, we will hold two face-to-face consensus meetings for patients and other stakeholders to develop the final COS for cardiac rehabilitation in MI.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Ethics Committee of Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine approved this study (2022DZMEC-349). The final COS will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated in conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

We registered this study in the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative (COMET) platform.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

1725 (http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/1725).

Surgical Handover Core Outcome Measures (SH-CORE): a protocol for the development of a core outcome set for trials in surgical handover

BACKGROUND

Surgical handover is associated with a significant risk of care failures. Existing research displays methodological deficiencies and little consensus on the outcomes that should be used to evaluate interventions in this area. This paper reports a protocol to develop a core outcome set (COS) to support standardisation, comparability, and evidence synthesis in future studies of surgical handover between doctors.

METHODS

This study adheres to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative guidance for COS development, including the COS-Standards for Development (COS-STAD) and Reporting (COS-STAR) recommendations. It has been registered prospectively on the COMET database and will be led by an international steering group that includes surgical healthcare professionals, researchers, and patient and public partners. An initial list of reported outcomes was generated through a systematic review of interventions to improve surgical handover (PROSPERO: CRD42022363198). Findings of a qualitative evidence synthesis of patient and public perspectives on handover will augment this list, followed by a real-time Delphi survey involving all stakeholder groups. Each Delphi participant will then be invited to take part in at least one online consensus meeting to finalise the COS.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) Research Ethics Committee (202309015, 7th November 2023). Results will be presented at surgical scientific meetings and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. A plain English summary will be disseminated through national websites and social media. The authors aim to integrate the COS into the handover curriculum of the Irish national surgical training body and ensure it is shared internationally with other postgraduate surgical training programmes. Collaborators will be encouraged to share the findings with relevant national health service functions and national bodies.

DISCUSSION

This study will represent the first published COS for interventions to improve surgical handover, the first use of a real-time Delphi survey in a surgical context, and will support the generation of better-quality evidence to inform best practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative 2675.  http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/2675 .

Identifying outcomes and outcome measures in neonatal family-centered care trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

A wide range of outcomes for infants and parents has been reported in clinical trials testing FCC interventions. This systematic review aimed to identify outcomes, outcome measures, and time-points reported in experimental studies testing FCC interventions in neonatal care units.

METHODS

This review included experimental studies investigating FCC interventions in neonatal settings. Database searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Scopus, JBI, Lilacs, and SciELO, completed in December 2022 and updated in November 2023. Critical appraisal was performed using the JBI checklist for randomized controlled trials, and a narrative synthesis process was used. Outcomes were categorized into the Comet Taxonomy core areas.

RESULTS

The search identified 8787 papers; 42 studies were included in the analysis. Totally, 60 outcomes were identified: 42 infant and 18 parents' outcomes. Outcomes were clustered into 12 domains for infants and five domains for parents and measured by 97 outcome measures. The included studies reported 25 and 27 different time-points for infants and parents, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This review of studies testing FCC interventions identified heterogeneity and inconsistency of outcomes, outcome measures, and time-points measuring the outcomes. Developing a core outcome set for FCC studies is warranted to benchmark the evidence and identify best-practices.

IMPACT

This systematic review identified inconsistency of outcomes, outcome measures, and time-points reported in quantitative studies testing family-centered care interventions in neonatal care settings. The lack of standardized outcomes and outcome measures reported in clinical trials makes it difficult to synthesize data to provide conclusive recommendations. This systematic review will contribute to the development of a core outcome set for research testing family-centered care interventions in neonatal care settings.

Outcomes of interventions in neonatal sepsis: A systematic review of qualitative research

BACKGROUND

While a systematic review exists detailing neonatal sepsis outcomes from clinical trials, there remains an absence of a qualitative systematic review capturing the perspectives of key stakeholders.

OBJECTIVES

Our aim is to identify outcomes from qualitative research on any intervention to prevent or improve the outcomes of neonatal sepsis that are important to parents, other family members, healthcare providers, policymakers, and researchers as a part of the development of a core outcome set (COS) for neonatal sepsis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A literature search was carried out using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycInfo databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Publications describing qualitative data relating to neonatal sepsis outcomes were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Drawing on the concepts of thematic synthesis, texts related to outcomes were coded and grouped. These outcomes were then mapped to the domain headings of an existing model.

MAIN RESULTS

Out of 6777 records screened, six studies were included. Overall, 19 outcomes were extracted from the included studies. The most frequently reported outcomes were those in the domains related to parents, healthcare workers and individual organ systemas such as gastrointestinal system. The remaining outcomes were classified under the headings of general outcomes, miscellaneous outcomes, survival, and infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes identified in this review are different from those reported in neonatal sepsis clinical trials, thus highlighting the importance of incorporating qualitative studies into COS development to encapsulate all relevant stakeholders' perspectives.

Developing a core outcome set for acetabular fractures: a systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials investigating acetabular fractures are heterogeneous in their investigated outcomes and their corresponding measurements. Standardization may facilitate comparability and pooling of research results, which would lead to an increase in knowledge about the optimal treatment of acetabular fractures, resulting in long-term evidence-based treatment decisions and improvements in patient care. The aim of this systematic review is to identify the reported outcomes and their measurements from studies on treatments for acetabular fractures to develop a core outcome set which contains the most relevant outcome measures to be included in future studies.

METHODS

Studies published in English and German including patients aged 16 years and older, with a surgically treated acetabular fracture, will be included. Studies with nonsurgical treatment, pathologic fractures, polytraumatized patients, and patients younger than 16 years of age will be excluded because other outcomes may be of interest in these cases. Any prospective and retrospective study will be included. Systematic reviews will be excluded, but their included studies will be screened for eligibility. The literature will be searched on MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP. Risk of selective reporting of outcomes will be assessed using the Outcome Reporting Bias in Trials classification system. Heterogeneously defined outcomes that measure the same outcome will be grouped and subsequently categorized into outcome domains using the taxonomy of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative.

DISCUSSION

It is expected that a high number of studies will be included, and many outcomes will be identified using different definitions and measurement instruments. A limitation of this systematic review is that only previously investigated outcomes will be detected, thus disregarding potentially relevant outcomes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022357644.

Peripheral Nerve Blocks in the Preoperative Management of Hip Fractures: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative efficacy of peripheral nerve block types for preoperative pain management of hip fractures.

METHODS

We searched Cochrane, Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar for randomized clinical trials. We included participants aged more than 16 years with hip fractures who received peripheral nerve blocks or analgesics for preoperative pain management. The primary outcomes were defined as absolute pain score 2 hours after block placement, preoperative consumption of morphine equivalents, and length of hospital stay. We used a random-effects network meta-analysis conceptualized in the Bayesian framework. Confidence of evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA).

RESULTS

We included 63 randomized controlled studies (4,778 participants), of which only a few had a low risk of bias. The femoral nerve block, 3-in-1 block, fascia iliaca compartment block, and pericapsular nerve group block yielded significantly lowered pain scores at 2 hours after block placement compared with those with no block (standardized mean differences [SMD]: -1.1; 95% credible interval [CrI]: -1.7 to -0.48, [confidence of evidence: low]; SMD: -1.8; 95% CrI: -3.0 to -0.55, [low]; SMD: -1.4; 95% CrI: -2.0 to -0.72, [low]; SMD: -2.3; 95% CrI: -3.2 to -1.4, [moderate], respectively). The pericapsular nerve group block, 3-in-1 block, fascia iliaca compartment block, and femoral nerve block resulted in lower pain scores than the no-block group. Additionally, the pericapsular nerve group block yielded a lower pain score than femoral nerve block or fascia iliaca compartment block (SMD: -1.21; 95% CrI: -2.18 to -0.23, [very low]: SMD: -0.92; 95% CrI: -1.70 to -0.16, [low]). However, both the fascia iliaca compartment block and femoral nerve block did not show a reduction in morphine consumption compared with no block. To our knowledge, no studies have compared the pericapsular nerve group block with other methods regarding morphine consumption. Furthermore, no significant difference was observed between peripheral nerve blocks and no block in terms of the length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with no block, preoperative peripheral nerve blocks for hip fractures appear to reduce pain 2 hours after block placement. Comparing different blocks, pericapsular nerve group block might be superior to fascia iliaca compartment block and femoral nerve block for pain relief, though the confidence evidence was low in most comparisons because of the moderate to high risk of bias in many of the included studies and the high heterogeneity of treatment strategies across studies. Therefore, further high-quality research is needed.

Allied health professionals' views on important outcomes of children's elective lower limb orthopaedic surgery: a qualitative interview study to inform a core outcome set

PURPOSE

A common methodological limitation of research that guides surgical procedure selection for children's elective lower limb orthopaedic surgeries is inconsistent outcome selection. Improving outcome consistency can be achieved through the development of a core outcome set (COS). The aim of this study is to identify which outcomes are considered important for children's elective lower limb orthopaedic surgeries by allied health professionals (AHPs) and explore why they select these outcomes, to inform a COS development project.

METHODS

Online semi-structured interviews were conducted with relevant AHPs. Participants were selected using maximum variation purposive sampling; selection was based on profession and inpatient/outpatient role. The data set was analysed using an inductive and deductive approach to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Four physiotherapists, three orthotists, three prosthetists, and two occupational therapists were interviewed. Most identified outcomes of importance related to "activities and participation". From the data, we conceptualised that AHPs with effective multidisciplinary communication focused on child-centred outcomes, while clinicians with limited multidisciplinary teamwork focused on role-based outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is concurrence between outcomes identified as important in this study, and other qualitative studies in similar populations. These important outcomes were seldom measured in previous studies or in routine clinical practice.Implications for rehabilitationAllied health professionals (AHPs) prioritise activity and participation outcomes after children's elective lower limb orthopaedic surgery.It is important to the rehabilitation of children after elective lower limb orthopaedic surgery that all involved AHPs collaborate with the wider multidisciplinary team.Multidisciplinary team communication encourages collaborative outcome identification, and discourages role defined outcome focus.

Five aspects of research waste in biomedicine: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The number of published journal articles has grown exponentially during the last 30 years, which may have led to some wasteful research. However, the terminology associated with research waste remains unclear. To address this, we aimed to identify, define, and categorize the aspects of research waste in published biomedical reports.

METHODS

In this scoping review, we systematically searched for biomedical literature reports from 1993 to 2023 in two databases, focusing on those addressing and defining research waste. Through data charting, we analyzed and categorized the aspects of research waste.

RESULTS

Based on 4285 initial records in the searches, a total of 832 reports were included in the analysis. The included reports were primarily narrative reviews (26%) and original reports (21%). We categorized research waste into five aspects: methodological, invisible, negligible, underreported, and structural (MINUS) research waste. More than half of the reports (56%) covered methodological research waste concerning flaws in study design, study conduct, or analysis. Invisible research waste covered nonpublication, discontinuation, and lack of data-sharing. Negligible research waste primarily concerned unnecessary repetition, for example, stemming from the absence of preceding a trial with a systematic review of the literature. Underreported research waste mainly included poor reporting, resulting in a lack of transparency. Structural research waste comprised inadequate management, collaboration, prioritization, implementation, and dissemination.

CONCLUSION

MINUS encapsulates the five main aspects of research waste. Recognizing these aspects of research waste is important for addressing and preventing further research waste and thereby ensuring efficient resource allocation and scientific integrity.

Reporting of Rehabilitation Outcomes in the Traumatic Lower Limb Amputation Literature: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the outcomes reported in the rehabilitation and community literature for adults with traumatic lower limb amputation (LLA).

DATA SOURCES

The search strategy was conducted in 3 databases (Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL) from inception to April 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

To be eligible, articles could be of any design but were required to have at least 50% adult individuals with traumatic LLA and had to report on interventions and outcomes in either a rehabilitation or community setting.

DATA EXTRACTION

The extracted outcomes were classified using Dodd's framework, which is designed for organizing research outcomes. Heterogeneity was observed in the outcome measures (OMs) used for evaluation. Two reviewers independently conducted the data extraction, which was verified by a third reviewer.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of the 7,834 articles screened, 47 articles reporting data on 692 individuals with traumatic LLA, met our inclusion criteria. Four core areas encompassing 355 OMs/indicators were identified: life effect (63.4%), physiological/clinical (30.1%), resource use (5.1%), and adverse events (1.4%). Physical functioning (eg, gait, mobility) was the most frequently reported outcome domain across studies, followed by nervous system outcomes (eg, pain) and psychiatric outcomes (eg, depression, anxiety). Domains such as global quality of life and role/emotional functioning were seldomly reported.

CONCLUSION

The study provides a list of outcome indicators explicitly published for adults with traumatic LLA, highlighting inconsistent reporting of outcome indicators. The lack of a standardized set of OMs is a barrier to performing meta-analyses on interventions, preventing the identification of effective care models and clinical pathways. Developing a core outcome set that includes OMs relevant to the needs of the traumatic LLA population may address these issues.

Reporting of core outcomes in gastric cancer surgery trials over the past 25 years (systematic review)

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer, a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, has seen limited improvement in survival over the past 3 decades. Surgical resection is the cornerstone of curative management but the optimal approach remains unclear. Decision-making is hindered by inconsistent outcome reporting limiting data synthesis between trials. International consensus between healthcare professionals and patients has formed a core outcome set to be reported as a minimum. We appraised outcomes previously reported.

METHODS

Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of RCTs during years 1995-2021. We searched trial registries for protocols of ongoing and future trials.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine articles from 64 studies and 69 trial protocols were included. No study reported all core outcomes: average reported per trial was 4 (interquartile range: 2). 'Serious' adverse events were reported by 98%, completeness of tumour removal by 85% and surgery-related death by 74%. Outcomes important to patients were reported least: quality of life (22%) and nutritional effects (15%). Defining outcomes and time frames used was variable.

CONCLUSIONS

Critically important outcomes are poorly reported in the literature and the status has not improved in future trials. Further work is required to improve uptake.

Sustainability of an outcome measure in outpatient stroke rehabilitation: A realist evaluation

RATIONALE

Only half of newly implemented evidence-based practices are sustained. Though poor sustainment can lead to negative consequences for clinical teams, organizations and patients, the causal explanations of sustainment are largely unknown.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

We aimed to ascertain how (mechanisms) and in what circumstances (context) a newly implemented outcome measure in rehabilitation was sustained or not (outcome).

METHODOLOGY

Informed by an integrated knowledge translation approach, we conducted a realist evaluation using a mixed method, embedded single case study design with data collection up to 18 months following the implementation of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory - version 4 (MPAI-4), a rehabilitation outcome measure. Quantitative data (survey and patient charts) was analysed using descriptive statistics, then integrated with qualitative data (interviews with 10 key informants) and analysed using inductive and deductive retroduction. We integrated the data to develop a case description and ultimately, to refine the programme theory to better understand the sustainability of the MPAI-4.

RESULTS

We linked context, mechanisms and outcomes, and also emphasized sustainability strategies in 18 explanations of how sustainability works. These explanations provide evidence for four overarching patterns: (1) implementation and sustainability phases are interconnected, (2) outcomes build on each other recursively, with patient benefits as the keystone outcome, (3) sustainment is achieved to varying levels across different sustainability outcomes [e.g., high level (e.g., rate of MPAI-4 scoring: 77.7%) to low level (e.g., rate of MPAI-4 application to clinical decision-making: 3.7%)] and (4) the work of sustaining the MPAI-4 is shared amongst different stakeholders.

CONCLUSION

Implementation teams can draw from this programme theory to improve the sustainment of outcomes measures while researchers could continue to refine the theory. Continued investigation of sustainability, including diverse and continuous sustainability outcomes, is needed to understand how to maintain improvements in quality of care and patient outcomes.

Frequency of Prenatal Care Visits: A Core Outcome Set for Prenatal Care Schedules

Objective: The aim of this study is to develop a core outcome set for the frequency and modality of prenatal care visits. Material and Methods: A consensus development study was conducted in the United States with participants, including 31 health care professionals, 12 public policy members or public health payers, and 18 public members, representing 24 states. A modified Delphi method and modified nominal group technique were utilized. Results: Twenty-one potential core outcomes were developed by combining the outcomes reported in three systematic reviews that evaluated the frequency of prenatal care visits or modality of prenatal visit type (e.g., in person, telemedicine, or hybrids of both). Eighteen consensus outcomes were identified from the Delphi process, following which 10 maternal and 4 neonatal outcomes were agreed at the consensus development meeting. Maternal core outcomes include maternal quality of life; maternal mental health outcomes; the experience of maternity care; lost time; attendance of recommended visits; unplanned care utilization; completion of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists-recommended services; diagnosis of obstetric complications-proportion and timing; disparities in care outcomes; and severe maternal morbidity or mortality. Neonatal core outcomes include gestational age at birth, birth weight, stillbirth or perinatal death, and neonatal intensive care unit admissions. Conclusions: The core outcome set for the frequency and modality of prenatal visits should be utilized in forthcoming randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews. Such application will warrant that in future research, consistent reporting will enrich care and improve outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration number: 2021.

Defining domains: developing consensus-based definitions for foundational domains in OMERACT core outcome sets

OBJECTIVE

To develop a set of detailed definitions for foundational domains commonly used in OMERACT (Outcome Measures in Rheumatology) core domain sets.

METHODS

We identified candidate domain definitions from prior OMERACT publications and websites and publications of major organizations involved in outcomes research for six domains commonly used in OMERACT Core Domain Sets: pain intensity, pain interference, physical function, fatigue, patient global assessment, and health-related quality of life. We conducted a two-round survey of OMERACT working groups, patient research partners, and then the OMERACT Technical Advisory Group to establish their preferred domain definitions. Results were presented at the OMERACT 2023 Methodology Workshop, where participants discussed their relevant lived experience and identified potential sources of variability giving the needed detail in our domain definitions.

RESULTS

One-hundred four people responded to both rounds of the survey, and a preferred definition was established for each of the domains except for patient global assessment for which no agreement was reached. Seventy-five participants at the OMERACT 2023 Methodology Workshop provided lived experience examples, which were used to contextualise domain definition reports for each of the five domains.

CONCLUSION

Using a consensus-based approach, we have created a detailed definition for five of the foundational domains in OMERACT core domain sets; patient global assessment requires further research. These definitions, although not mandatory for working groups to use, may facilitate the initial domain-match assessment step of instrument selection, and reduce the time and resources required by future OMERACT groups when developing core outcome sets.

Patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the ICU: A mixed-methods study of patient and family perspectives

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to create a definition of patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding during critical illness as an outcome for a randomized trial.

DESIGN

This was a sequential mixed-methods qualitative-dominant multi-center study with an instrument-building aim. In semi-structured individual interviews or focus groups we elicited views from survivors of critical illness and family members of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) regarding which features indicate important gastrointestinal bleeding. Quantitative demographic characteristics were collected. We analyzed qualitative data using inductive content analysis to develop a definition for patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

SETTING

Canada and the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

51 ICU survivors and family members of ICU patients.

RESULTS

Participants considered gastrointestinal bleeding to be important if it resulted in death, disability, or prolonged hospitalization. The following also signaled patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding: blood transfusion, vasopressors, endoscopy, CT-angiography, or surgery. Whether an intervention evinced concern depended on its effectiveness, side-effects, invasiveness and accessibility; contextual influences included participant familiarity and knowledge of interventions and trust in the clinical team.

CONCLUSIONS

Survivors of critical illness and family members described patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding differently than current definitions of clinically-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

A review and analysis of outcomes in randomized clinical trials of plasma transfusion in patients with bleeding or for the prevention of bleeding: The BEST collaborative study

BACKGROUND

Previous systematic reviews have revealed an inconsistency of outcome definitions as a major barrier in providing evidence-based guidance for the use of plasma transfusion to prevent or treat bleeding. We reviewed and analyzed outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide a methodology for describing and classifying outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

RCTs involving transfusion of plasma published after 2000 were identified from a prior review (Yang 2012) and combined with an updated systematic literature search of multiple databases (July 1, 2011 to January 17, 2023). Inclusion of publications, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments were performed in duplicate. (PROSPERO registration number is: CRD42020158581).

RESULTS

In total, 5579 citations were identified in the new systematic search and 22 were included. Six additional trials were identified from the previous review, resulting in a total of 28 trials: 23 therapeutic and five prophylactic studies. An increasing number of studies in the setting of major bleeding such as in cardiovascular surgery and trauma were identified. Eighty-seven outcomes were reported with a mean of 11 (min-max. 4-32) per study. There was substantial variation in outcomes used with a preponderance of surrogate measures for clinical effect such as laboratory parameters and blood usage.

CONCLUSION

There is an expanding literature on plasma transfusion to inform guidelines. However, considerable heterogeneity of reported outcomes constrains comparisons. A core outcome set should be developed for plasma transfusion studies. Standardization of outcomes will motivate better study design, facilitate comparison, and improve clinical relevance for future trials of plasma transfusion.

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.

Patient-reported outcome measures in adult HIV care: A rapid scoping review of targeted outcomes and instruments used

OBJECTIVE

There is international interest in the integration of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) into routine HIV care, but little work has synthesized the content of published initiatives. We conducted a rapid scoping review primarily to identify their selected patient-reported outcomes and respective instruments.

METHODS

Four databases were searched on 4 May 2022 (Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO) for relevant English language documents published from 2005 onwards. Dual review of at least 20% of records, full texts and data extraction was performed. Outcomes and instruments were classified with an adapted 14-domain taxonomy. Instruments with evidence of validation were described.

RESULTS

Of 13 062 records generated for review, we retained a final sample of 94 documents, referring to 60 distinct initiatives led mostly in the USA (n = 29; 48% of initiatives), Europe (n = 16; 27%) and Africa (n = 9; 15%). The measured patient-reported outcome domains were: mental health (n = 42; 70%), substance use (n = 23; 38%), self-management (n = 16; 27%), symptoms (n = 12; 20%), sexual/reproductive health (n = 12; 20%), physical health (n = 9; 15%), treatment (n= 8; 13%), cognition (n = 7; 12%), quality of life (n = 7; 12%), violence/abuse (n = 6; 10%), stigma (n = 6; 10%), socioeconomic issues (n = 5; 8%), social support (n = 3; 5%) and body/facial appearance (n = 1; 2%). Initiatives measured 2.6 outcome domains, on average (range = 1-11). In total, 62 distinct validated PROMs were identified, with 53 initiatives (88%) employing at least one (M = 2.2). Overwhelmingly, the most used instrument was any version of the Patient Health Questionnaire to measure symptoms of depression, employed by over a third (26; 43%) of initiatives.

CONCLUSION

Published PROM initiatives in HIV care have spanned 19 countries and disproportionately target mental health and substance use.

Rosacea Core Domain Set for Clinical Trials and Practice: A Consensus Statement

Importance

Inconsistent reporting of outcomes in clinical trials of rosacea is impeding and likely preventing accurate data pooling and meta-analyses. There is a need for standardization of outcomes assessed during intervention trials of rosacea.

Objective

To develop a rosacea core outcome set (COS) based on key domains that are globally relevant and applicable to all demographic groups to be used as a minimum list of outcomes for reporting by rosacea clinical trials, and when appropriate, in clinical practice.

Evidence Review

A systematic literature review of rosacea clinical trials was conducted. Discrete outcomes were extracted and augmented through discussions and focus groups with key stakeholders. The initial list of 192 outcomes was refined to identify 50 unique outcomes that were rated through the Delphi process Round 1 by 88 panelists (63 physicians from 17 countries and 25 patients with rosacea in the US) on 9-point Likert scale. Based on feedback, an additional 11 outcomes were added in Round 2. Outcomes deemed to be critical for inclusion (rated 7-9 by ≥70% of both groups) were discussed in consensus meetings. The outcomes deemed to be most important for inclusion by at least 85% of the participants were incorporated into the final core domain set.

Findings

The Delphi process and consensus-building meetings identified a final core set of 8 domains for rosacea clinical trials: ocular signs and symptoms; skin signs of disease; skin symptoms; overall severity; patient satisfaction; quality of life; degree of improvement; and presence and severity of treatment-related adverse events. Recommendations were also made for application in the clinical setting.

Conclusions and Relevance

This core domain set for rosacea research is now available; its adoption by researchers may improve the usefulness of future trials of rosacea therapies by enabling meta-analyses and other comparisons across studies. This core domain set may also be useful in clinical practice.

The range of outcomes and outcome measurement instruments collected in multisectoral community-based obesity prevention interventions in children: A systematic review

Multicomponent and multisectoral community-based interventions (CBIs) have proven potential in preventing overweight and obesity in children. Synthesizing evidence on the outcomes collected and reported in such CBIs is critical for the evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. This systematic review aimed to identify the range of outcomes and outcome measurement instruments collected and reported in multisectoral and multicomponent CBIs for obesity prevention in children. A systematic search updated an existing review and extended the search to 11 academic databases (2017-2023) and gray literature. Outcomes were classified into outcome domains, and common measurement instruments were summarized. Seventeen outcome domains from 140 unique outcomes were identified from 45 included interventions reported in 120 studies. The most frequently collected outcome domains included anthropometry and body composition (91% of included interventions), physical activity (84%), dietary intake (71%), environmental (71%), and sedentary behavior (62%). The most frequently collected outcomes from each of these domains included body mass index (89%), physical activity (73%), fruit and vegetable intake (58%), school environment (42%), and screen time (58%). Outcome measurement instruments varied, particularly for behavioral outcomes. Standardization of reported outcomes and measurement instruments is recommended to facilitate data harmonization and support quantifying broader benefits of CBIs for obesity prevention.

Methods for Neuroscience Drug Development: Guidance on Standardization of the Process for Defining Clinical Outcome Strategies in Clinical Trials

Neurosciences clinical trials continue to have notoriously high failure rates. Appropriate outcomes selection in early clinical trials is key to maximizing the likelihood of identifying new treatments in psychiatry and neurology. The field lacks good standards for designing outcome strategies, therefore The Outcomes Research Group was formed to develop and promote good practices in outcome selection. This article describes the first published guidance on the standardization of the process for clinical outcomes in neuroscience. A minimal step process is defined starting as early as possible, covering key activities for evidence generation in support of content validity, patient-centricity, validity requirements and considerations for regulatory acceptance. Feedback from expert members is provided, regarding the risks of shortening the process and examples supporting the recommended process are summarized. This methodology is now available to researchers in industry, academia or clinics aiming to implement consensus-based standard practices for clinical outcome selection, contributing to maximizing the efficiency of clinical research.

Management of primary snoring in adults: A scoping review examining interventions, outcomes and instruments used to assess clinical effects

While various treatment options for primary snoring are available, evidence-based recommendations to determine the optimal intervention remain unestablished. To inform future directions of research to guide clinical decision-making, this scoping review was conducted to map the existing evidence on interventions for primary snoring, the outcomes and instruments used to assess their clinical effects in adults. The feasibility of conducting further systematic reviews and comparing outcomes across these therapies using network meta-analysis was also assessed. Of the 1673 records identified, 38 interventional studies met the inclusion criteria with three-fifths of them being before-after studies. The most common reason for study exclusion was results being reported for patients with primary snoring and obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) combined. Interventions were surgical (73 %), behavioural and the use of devices/medications. Twenty-six common outcomes were identified and categorised into six domains. Fifty-nine instruments were used to assess the outcomes and based mainly on non-validated questionnaires. Our findings indicated (1) the need for randomised controlled trials with strict discrimination between patients with primary snoring and OSA, (2) further network meta-analyses using some outcomes is feasible, and (3) a core outcome set to inform standardised reporting for future research should be developed.

Development of a core outcome set for treatment studies for provoked vestibulodynia

BACKGROUND

There is an inconsistency in treatment outcomes used in clinical trials for provoked vestibulodynia (PVD), which makes it impossible to compare the effects of different interventions.

AIM

In this study, we completed the first step in creating a core outcome set (COS), defining what outcomes should be measured in clinical trials for PVD.

METHODS

Identification of outcomes used in studies was done by extracting data from clinical trials in a recently published systematic review and via review of clinical trials for PVD registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. The COS process consisted of 2 rounds of Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting, during which the final COS was decided through a modified nominal group technique.

OUTCOMES

Consensus on what outcomes to include in a COS for PVD.

RESULTS

Forty scientific articles and 92 study protocols were reviewed for outcomes. Of those, 36 articles and 25 protocols were eligible, resulting in 402 outcomes, which were then categorized into 63 unique outcomes. Participants consisted of patients, relatives/partners of patients, health care professionals, and researchers. Out of 463 who registered for participation, 319 and 213 responded to the first and second surveys, respectively. The consensus meeting consisted of 18 members and resulted in 6 outcomes for the COS to be measured in all treatment trials regardless of intervention: insertional pain (nonsexual), insertional pain (sexual), provoked vulvar pain by pressure/contact, pain-related interference on one's life, pain interference on sexual life, and sexual function.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Critical outcomes to be measured in clinical trials will allow for accurate comparison of outcomes across treatment interventions and provide solid treatment recommendations.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

The major strengths of the study are the adherence to methodological recommendations and the intentional focus on aspects of diversity of participating stakeholders (eg, status such as patients with lived experience and researchers, inclusiveness with respect to sexual identity), the latter of which will allow for broader application and relevance of the COS. Among the limitations of the study are the low rate of participants outside North America and Europe and the lower response rate (about 50%) for the second Delphi survey.

CONCLUSION

In this international project, patients, health care professionals, and researchers have decided what critical outcomes are to be used in future clinical trials for PVD. Before the COS can be fully implemented, there is also a need to decide on how and preferably when the outcomes should be measured.

Analysis of outcome reporting in sciatic neuropathy studies: a systematic review of the literature

PURPOSE

As a first step towards developing a core outcome set (COS) for sciatic neuropathy, the goal of the current study was to perform a systematic review of the literature to identify outcome measures that have been previously reported in studies on sciatic neuropathy.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature from 2000-2024 was performed utilizing PubMed and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). Identified articles were screened according to study inclusion/exclusion criteria. Outcome measures reported in each included study were recorded and categorized into motor, sensory, pain, patient-reported outcomes, electrodiagnostic outcomes, imaging outcomes, and composite outcomes. Descriptive statistics were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1586 articles were initially identified, and 31 articles met criteria for inclusion and underwent analysis. The most common outcome domain was pain. A pain outcome was reported in 17 (63%) studies. A motor outcome was reported in 10 (37%) studies; 6 (22%) reported a sensory outcome; 1 (4%) reported a composite outcome; 4 (15%) reported an electrodiagnostic outcome; 5 (19%) reported a patient-reported outcome; 3 (11%) reported an imaging outcome. Across the included studies, 21 unique outcomes were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified the outcome measures that have previously been utilized in studies on sciatic neuropathy. Previously used outcome measures fell into seven domains: motor outcomes, sensory outcomes, pain outcomes, patient-reported outcomes, electrodiagnostic outcomes, imaging outcomes, and composite outcomes. Pain outcomes were most commonly used across the included studies.

Effectiveness of Interventions for Changing More Than One Behavior at a Time to Manage Chronic Conditions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Health behaviors play a significant role in chronic disease management. Rather than being independent of one another, health behaviors often co-occur, suggesting that targeting more than one health behavior in an intervention has the potential to be more effective in promoting better health outcomes.

PURPOSE

We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials of interventions that target more than one behavior to examine the effectiveness of multiple health behavior change interventions in patients with chronic conditions.

METHODS

Five electronic databases (Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Cochrane) were systematically searched in November 2023, and studies included in previous reviews were also consulted. We included randomized trials of interventions aiming to change more than one health behavior in individuals with chronic conditions. Two independent reviewers screened and extracted data, and used Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2 tool. Meta-analyses were conducted to estimate the effects of interventions on change in health behaviors. Results were presented as Cohen's d for continuous data, and risk ratio for dichotomous data.

RESULTS

Sixty-one studies were included spanning a range of chronic diseases: cardiovascular (k = 25), type 2 diabetes (k = 15), hypertension (k = 10), cancer (k = 7), one or more chronic conditions (k = 3), and multiple conditions (k = 1). Most interventions aimed to change more than one behavior simultaneously (rather than in sequence) and most targeted three particular behaviors at once: "physical activity, diet and smoking" (k = 20). Meta-analysis of 43 eligible studies showed for continuous data (k = 29) a small to substantial positive effect on behavior change for all health behaviors (d = 0.081-2.003) except for smoking (d = -0.019). For dichotomous data (k = 23) all analyses showed positive effects of targeting more than one behavior on all behaviors (RR = 1.026-2.247).

CONCLUSIONS

Targeting more than one behavior at a time is effective in chronic disease management and more research should be directed into developing the science of multiple behavior change.

Critical outcomes to be included in the Core Outcome Set for nutritional intervention studies in older adults with malnutrition or at risk of malnutrition: a modified Delphi Study

INTRODUCTION

As part of the development of an agreed minimum set of outcomes or Core Outcome Set (COS) for future nutritional intervention trials in older adults with malnutrition or at risk of malnutrition, this work reports on the Delphi surveys and final consensus.

METHODS

Outcomes from a scoping review were incorporated into a two-round Delphi survey. Researchers and healthcare professionals experienced in malnutrition in older adults were invited to take part in an online survey to rate 38 selected outcomes on a nine-point Likert scale ranging from 'not important' to 'critical' for their setting (community, hospital, or long-term care). Consensus for inclusion was reached when ≥75% (or ≥60% if a patient-reported outcome) of the participants scored the outcome as 'critical' and <15% as 'not important'. Resulting outcomes were voted for inclusion or exclusion in the COS in a final online consensus meeting.

RESULTS

Ninety-three and 72 participants from diverse professional backgrounds and countries participated in the 1st and 2nd Delphi round, respectively. After both rounds eleven outcomes met the inclusion criteria, largely irrespective of setting. Fifteen participants, representing academia, health care, health policy, industry, and PPI, voted in a final online consensus meeting resulting in ten outcomes: malnutrition status, dietary intake, appetite, body weight or BMI, muscle strength, muscle mass, functional performance, functional limitations, quality of life, and acceptability of the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Ten outcomes will form the COS which is intended to be used by the scientific community in all future nutritional intervention studies for older adults with malnutrition or at risk of malnutrition. The subsequent phase will establish the appropriate methods to measure these outcomes.