20-10-2016 | Uitgave 4/2017
Patient-reported outcome measures in older people with hip fracture: a systematic review of quality and acceptability
- Tijdschrift:
- Quality of Life Research > Uitgave 4/2017
Belangrijke opmerkingen
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-016-1424-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Abstract
Purpose
Hip fracture is the most common serious injury of older people, often resulting in reduced mobility and loss of independence. However, guidance for the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) does not exist: we describe the first review to apply internationally endorsed criteria in support of PROM quality and acceptability in this group, and make recommendations for future applications.
Methods
Systematic literature searches of major databases (1980–2015) to identify published evidence of the application and quality of clearly defined measures. Evidence of measurement and practical properties, and the extent of active patient involvement, was sought. Study and PROM quality was assessed against recommended criteria.
Results
Seventy-one articles relating to 28 PROMs (Generic n = 12; Specific n = 16) were included. The SF-36 (v1) and EuroQoL EQ-5D 3L were the most widely evaluated measures with acceptable evidence of measurement properties, but limited evaluations of practical properties or relevance to this group. Evidence was mostly limited for the remaining measures. Hypothesized associations between variables were infrequently evaluated. Evidence of data quality, test–retest reliability, responsiveness, interpretation, acceptability and feasibility was also limited. Active patient involvement in PROM development or evaluation was not reported. There was limited evaluation of proxy completions.
Conclusions
The paucity of robust evaluations is disappointing and prevents clear recommendations for PROM-based assessment. Further research must urgently seek to identify which outcomes really matter to this group. Future PROM selection must be underpinned by research which focuses on methodological quality, including issues of acceptability, relevance, feasibility of application, and proxy completion, whilst seeking to actively incorporate the perspective of patients and their advocates.