Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument for Patients With Severe Lower Extremity Trauma (LIMB-Q): Protocol for a Multiphase Mixed Methods Study

The WOUND-Q Function and Symptoms Scales for Chronic Lower Extremity Wounds: A Validation Study

Objective: Determine the validity and reliability of the LIMB-Q scales, Function, and Symptoms in patients with chronic lower extremity wounds. Approach: Cognitive debriefing interviews with people with current or previous wounds were conducted to examine content validity. Scales were field-tested in an international sample of people with chronic lower extremity wounds sourced from an online platform (i.e., Prolific). Psychometric properties were examined using the Rasch Measurement Theory analysis. A test-retest reproducibility study was performed, and construct validity was examined. Results: Content validity was established after 10 cognitive interviews. A total of 233 people with lower extremity wounds (age 19-80 years, mean 39.3) participated in the field test. All 25 items tested demonstrated good fit to the Rasch model with ordered thresholds. One item had a fit residual outside ±2.5, but no items had significant χ2 values after Bonferroni adjustment. Reliability was high with the person separation index, Cronbach alpha, and intraclass correlation coefficient values >0.8. Strong correlations were found between the Function and Symptoms scales and EQ-5D dimensions measuring similar constructs as well as the EQ-5D global score. All hypotheses for construct validity were confirmed. Innovation: Patient-reported outcome measures are an important component of patient-centered care, as they capture the patient's perspective in a rigorous and reproducible way. Adding these two scales to the WOUND-Q provides a means to measure function and symptoms associated with lower extremity wounds. Conclusion: These new WOUND-Q scales can be used to measure outcomes important to patients with lower extremity wounds in clinical settings and research studies.

German Translation and Linguistic Validation of the LIMB‑Q: A Patient-reported Outcome Measure for Lower Extremity Trauma

Background

Lower extremity trauma can have a significant impact on a patient's quality of life. The LIMB-Q is a recently developed and validated patient-reported outcome measure that assesses patient-specific outcomes and experience of health care. The aim of this study was to translate and linguistically validate the LIMB-Q from English to German.

Methods

The translation was performed by combining World Health Organization and Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research guidelines. The process consisted of forward translations, a backward translation, expert panel meetings, cognitive debriefing interviews with patients, and several rounds of discussion and reconciliation with the creators of LIMB-Q. The goal was to obtain a culturally and conceptually accurate translation of LIMB-Q into German for use in Switzerland.

Results

From the two forward translations, there was one primary discrepancy between the two translators that was discussed to determine the most conceptually accurate translation. From the backward translations, there were 63 items that required discussion and re-translation. Nine patients participated in the cognitive debriefing interviews, which led to three items being modified. The translation process led to a linguistically validated and conceptually equivalent German version of the LIMB-Q.

Conclusions

The German (Switzerland) version of LIMB-Q is now available. This will offer a valuable tool for lower extremity trauma research and clinical care in German-speaking populations.

Financial Toxicity Is Common in Patients After Tibia Fracture

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the presence of financial distress and identify risk factors for financial toxicity in patients after tibial shaft fracture.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING

Level I trauma center.

PATIENTS

All patients within 4 years after tibial shaft fracture (open, closed, or fracture that required flap reconstruction).

INTERVENTION

Injury-related financial distress.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Financial distress related to the injury, as reported by the patient in a binary question. Financial toxicity using the LIMB-Q, scored from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more financial toxicity.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 142 patients after tibial shaft fracture [44% closed (n = 62), 41% open (n = 58), and 15% flap (n = 22)]. The mean age was 44 years (SD 17), 61% were men, and the mean time from injury was 15 months. Financial distress was reported by 64% of patients (95% confidence interval, 56% to 72%). Financial toxicity did not differ by fracture severity ( P = 0.12). Medical complications were associated with a 14-point increase in financial toxicity ( P = 0.04). Age older than 65 years (-15 points, P = 0.03) and incomes of $70,000 or more ($70,000-$99,999, -15 points, P = 0.02; >$100,000, -19 points, P < 0.01) protected against financial toxicity.

CONCLUSION

We observed financial distress levels more than twice the proportion observed after cancer. Medical complications, lower incomes, and younger age were associated with increased financial toxicity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Patient-reported Outcome Measures following Traumatic Lower Extremity Amputation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Outcomes after traumatic major lower extremity amputation (MLEA) have focused on surgical complications, despite the life-altering impact on patients. With advances in the surgical management of MLEA, a heightened need for consistent reporting of patient-centered outcomes (PCO) remains. This meta-analysis assesses articles for the prevalence and methods of PCO reporting among traumatic MLEA studies.

METHODS

An electronic database search was completed using Ovid MEDLINE for studies published between 2000 and 2020. Studies were included that reported any outcome of traumatic MLEA. Weighted means of outcomes were calculated when data were available. The prevalence of PCO was assessed in the categories of physical function, quality of life (QOL), psychosocial, and pain. Trends in PCO reporting were analyzed using Pearson's chi-squared test and analysis of variance when appropriate.

RESULTS

In total, 7001 studies were screened, yielding 156 articles for inclusion. PCO were evaluated in 94 (60.3%) studies; 83 (53.2%) reported physical function and mobility outcomes, 33 (21.2%) reported QOL and satisfaction measures, 38 (24.4%) reported psychosocial data, and 43 (27.6%) reported pain outcomes. There was no change in prevalence of PCO reporting when comparing 5-year intervals between 2000 and 2020 (P = 0.557).

CONCLUSIONS

Optimization of function and QOL following traumatic MLEA has become a cornerstone of surgical success; however, only 60% of studies report PCO, with no trend over the last two decades suggesting improvement. As healthcare progresses toward patient-centered care, this inconsistent means of reporting PCO calls for improved inclusion and standardization of instruments to assess function, QOL, and other patient-focused measures.

Exploring what is important to patients with regards to quality of life after experiencing a lower limb reconstructive procedure: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to understand the impact of lower limb reconstruction surgery on patients' quality of life (QOL). Existing measures have not been developed to specifically capture patient experiences amongst adults with lower limb conditions that require reconstruction surgery. This review aimed to synthesise qualitative evidence to identify what is important to patients requiring, undergoing, or following reconstructive surgery for lower limb conditions.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO and Cinahl were searched from inception until November 2020. Studies were included if they employed qualitative research methods, involved patients requiring, undergoing or following lower limb reconstruction and explored patients' experiences of care, treatment, recovery and QOL. Mixed methods studies that did not separately report qualitative findings, mixed population studies that were not separately reported and studies in languages other than English were excluded. Included studies were analysed using thematic synthesis. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative studies checklist was used to undertake quality assessment.

RESULTS

Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. The thematic synthesis identified two overarching themes: (1) areas of living key to QOL for lower limb reconstruction patients and (2) moving towards a new normal. The way in which lower limb reconstruction affects an individual's QOL and their recovery is complex and is influenced by a range of inter-related factors, which will affect patients to varying degrees depending on their individual circumstances. We identified these factors as: pain, daily functioning and lifestyle, identity, income, emotional wellbeing, support, the ability to adapt and adjust and the ability to move forwards.

CONCLUSIONS

The way patients' QOL is affected after a lower limb reconstruction is complex, may change over time and is strongly linked to their recovery. These findings will aid us in developing a conceptual framework which identifies the outcomes important to patients and those that should be included in a PROM. Further research is then required to establish whether the range of factors we identified are captured by existing PROMs. Depending on the outcome of this work, a new PROM for patients following lower limb reconstruction may be required.

Content Validity of the LIMB-Q: A Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument for Lower Extremity Trauma Patients

BACKGROUND

 Limb-threatening lower extremity traumatic injuries can be devastating events with a multifaceted impact on patients. Therefore, evaluating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in addition to traditional surgical outcomes is important. However, currently available instruments are limited as they were not developed specific to lower extremity trauma patients and lack content validity. The LIMB-Q is being developed as a novel PRO instrument to meet this need, with the goal to measure all relevant concepts and issues impacting amputation and limb-salvage patients after limb-threatening lower extremity trauma.

METHODS

 This is a qualitative interview-based study evaluating content validity for the LIMB-Q. Patients aged 18 years and older who underwent amputation, reconstruction, or amputation after failed reconstruction were recruited using purposeful sampling to maximize variability of participant experiences. Expert opinion was solicited from a variety of clinical providers and qualitative researchers internationally. Preliminary items and scales were modified, added, or removed based on participant and expert feedback after each round of participant interviews and expert opinion.

RESULTS

 Twelve patients and 43 experts provided feedback in a total of three rounds, with changes to the preliminary instrument made between each round. One scale was dropped after round one, one scale was added after round two, and only minor changes were needed after round three. Modifications, additions and removal of items, instructions, and response options were made after each round using feedback gathered.

CONCLUSION

 The LIMB-Q was refined and modified to reflect feedback from patients and experts in the field. Content validity for the LIMB-Q was established. Following a large-scale field test, the LIMB-Q will be ready for use in research and clinical care.