Literature DB >> 10552111

Outcomes research: what to measure.

J G Wright1.   

Abstract

Surgeons assess the outcomes of treatment to determine if treatment is effective. The most commonly used types of outcomes have been measures of disease process (or impairment measures) because surgery is often directed toward ameliorating abnormalities of structure or function. Patient-based outcomes, such as measures of health or health-related quality of life, are necessary, however, to determine if patients have been made better by treatment. Disease-specific measures of health focus specifically on those aspects of the disease of most concern to patients, whereas generic measures of health and health-related quality-of-life measures have a much broader focus. Patient satisfaction is an additional increasingly used outcome measure. Satisfaction may be directed toward the processes of care or the outcomes of care. Satisfaction with the outcomes of care is an important secondary outcome provided the aims of treatment have been achieved and the health of patients has been improved. In conclusion, different outcomes of treatment provide different and complementary information and all have a role to play in deciding if surgical treatments are effective.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10552111     DOI: 10.1007/s002689900652

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  9 in total

Review 1.  Evaluation of instruments for measuring the burden of sport and active recreation injury.

Authors:  Nadine E Andrew; Belinda J Gabbe; Rory Wolfe; Peter A Cameron
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 11.136

2.  Modified onlay technique for the repair of the more complicated incisional hernias: single-centre evaluation of a large cohort.

Authors:  M M Poelman; B L A M Langenhorst; J F Schellekens; W H Schreurs
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2010-03-14       Impact factor: 4.739

3.  [Quality management of interdisciplinary treatment of polytrauma. Possibilities and limits of retrospective routine data collection].

Authors:  M T Hirschmann; K-N Uike; M Kaufmann; R Huegli; P Regazzoni; T Gross
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.041

4.  Health-related quality of life in patients treated for incisional hernia with an onlay technique.

Authors:  M M Poelman; J F Schellekens; B L A M Langenhorst; W H Schreurs
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2010-01-09       Impact factor: 4.739

Review 5.  How to use outcomes questionnaires: pearls and pitfalls.

Authors:  Sunitha Malay; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  Clin Plast Surg       Date:  2012-11-26       Impact factor: 2.017

6.  Comparison of the Dutch and English versions of the Carolinas Comfort Scale: a specific quality-of-life questionnaire for abdominal hernia repairs with mesh.

Authors:  K Nielsen; M M Poelman; F M den Bakker; T van der Ploeg; H J Bonjer; W H Schreurs
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2013-10-29       Impact factor: 4.739

7.  Translation, Pilot Psychometric Validation, and Comparative Performance of the Arabic Version of the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS).

Authors:  Sireen Abdul Rahim Shilbayeh; Sahar Abd El Rahman Ismail
Journal:  J Pharm Bioallied Sci       Date:  2020-12-16

8.  Preoperative and early postoperative quality of life after major surgery - a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Julien Maillard; Nadia Elia; Chiara S Haller; Cécile Delhumeau; Bernhard Walder
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2015-02-04       Impact factor: 3.186

9.  Adaptation to illness in relation to pain perceived by patients after surgery.

Authors:  Mariusz Chabowski; Michał Junke; Jan Juzwiszyn; Magdalena Milan; Maciej Malinowski; Dariusz Janczak
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2017-06-23       Impact factor: 3.133

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.