Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
To assess whether the measurement error, and recall bias can reach magnitudes comparable to minimally important difference (MID) in symptoms scores used in chronic venous disease-specific quality of life QOL instruments, such as Specific Quality of Life & Outcomes Response-Venous (SQOR-V) questionnaire.
Prospective non-randomized study of 150 patients with primary chronic venous disease. SQOR-V questionnaire was administered prior to clinical visit (in 32 patients twice), and 1 month post-treatment. Patients were asked to recall their symptoms 12 months later. Measurement error (SEM) was calculated from repeated baseline measurements. MID was derived from change in the symptom score (SS) part of the SQOR-V questionnaire at 1 month. Recall bias was calculated from 12-month recall data.
SEM was 1.91, the recall bias was −3.16 (95% CI from −4.08 to −2.24), and the MID was 3.7. In the treatment group the recall bias was negative (recall more severe symptoms than they actually were at the baseline), patients in the observation group had positive recall bias. SS change moderately correlated with transition rating index (Spearman rank-order correlation 0.526, P < 0.0001), and strongly correlated with the baseline value (Pearson r = 0.84).
The measurement error of patient-reported symptoms scores included in disease-specific QOL instruments is small, but recall bias is close in magnitude to MID.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Kundu, S., Lurie, F., Millward, S. F., Padberg, F., Jr, Vedantham, S., Elias, S., et al. (2007). Recommended reporting standards for endovenous ablation for the treatment of venous insufficiency: Joint statement of The American Venous Forum and The Society of Interventional Radiology. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 46(3), 582–589. PubMedCrossRef
Lurie, F., Creton, D., Eklof, B., Kabnick, L. S., Kistner, R. L., Pichot, O., et al. (2005). Prospective randomised study of endovenous radiofrequency obliteration (closure) versus ligation and vein stripping (EVOLVeS): Two-year follow-up. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, 29(1), 67–73. PubMedCrossRef
Testa, M. A. (2000). Interpretation of quality-of-life outcomes: Issues that affect magnitude and meaning. Medical Care, 38(9 Suppl), II166–II174. PubMed
Erickson, P. (2000). Assessment of the evaluative properties of health status instruments. Medical Care, 38(9 Suppl), II95–II99. PubMed
Brozek, J. L., Guyatt, G. H., Heels-Ansdell, D., Degl’Innocenti, A., Armstrong, D., Fallone, C. A., et al. (2009). Specific HRQL instruments and symptom scores were more responsive than preference-based generic instruments in patients with GERD. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(1), 102–110. PubMedCrossRef
- In prospective study using Specific Quality of Life & Outcomes Response-Venous (SQOR-V) questionnaire the recall bias had the same magnitude as the minimally important difference
Robert L. Kistner
- Springer Netherlands