Literature DB >> 18242337

Systematic review on recovery specific quality-of-life instruments.

Kirsten B Kluivers1, Ingrid Riphagen, Mark E Vierhout, Hans A M Brölmann, Henrica C W de Vet.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Postoperative recovery is a considerable issue in studies comparing operative techniques of similar effectiveness. In recent years, a shift has occurred toward patient-centered study outcomes such as quality-of-life questionnaires. The objective of this article is to provide a systematic review of the literature on general postoperative, recovery-specific quality-of-life instruments and their measurement properties.
METHODS: We searched the databases EMBASE.com, Cinahl, PsycINFO, and PubMed for articles reporting on postoperative, recovery-specific quality-of-life instruments. A checklist was used to assess the revealed studies and instruments. Existing quality criteria were applied to the measurement properties to compare the instruments.
RESULTS: The search strategy identified 620 studies, of which 18 studies reported on 12 different postoperative, recovery-specific quality-of-life instruments. None of the instruments had been validated completely in line with the 8 quality criteria, which were used to assess the measurement properties. Two instruments were clearly superior, which were the Postdischarge surgical recovery scale and the Quality of recovery-40.
CONCLUSIONS: No fully validated instrument is available for the assessment of general postoperative recovery. We advise to use the Postdischarge surgical recovery scale and the Quality of recovery-40 in future validation and application studies on short-term postoperative recovery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18242337     DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2007.08.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   3.982


  24 in total

1.  Reporting on quality of life in randomised controlled trials in gastrointestinal surgery.

Authors:  Valerie Bridoux; Grégoire Moutel; Benoit Lefebure; Michel Scotte; Francis Michot; Christian Herve; Jean-Jacques Tuech
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  How well are we measuring postoperative "recovery" after abdominal surgery?

Authors:  Lawrence Lee; Teodora Dumitra; Julio F Fiore; Nancy E Mayo; Liane S Feldman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-05-24       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 3.  State of the art of prostatic arterial embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Authors:  Mario Petrillo; Filippo Pesapane; Enrico Maria Fumarola; Ilaria Emili; Marzia Acquasanta; Francesca Patella; Salvatore Alessio Angileri; Umberto G Rossi; Igor Piacentini; Antonio Maria Granata; Anna Maria Ierardi; Gianpaolo Carrafiello
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2018-04

4.  Use of quality of recovery score (QoR40) in the assessment of postoperative recovery and evaluation of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols.

Authors:  Yuu Tanaka; Atushi Yoshimura; Kyoko Tagawa; Dai Shida; Masahiko Kawaguchi
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2014-01-11       Impact factor: 2.078

5.  Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) vs GreenLight photoselective vaporization of benign prostatic hyperplasia: analysis of BPH6 outcomes after 1 year of follow-up.

Authors:  S Cimino; S Voce; F Palmieri; V Favilla; T Castelli; S Privitera; R Giardina; G Reale; G I Russo; G Morgia
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2017-08-17       Impact factor: 2.896

Review 6.  Meaningful outcome measures in cardiac surgery.

Authors:  Paul S Myles
Journal:  J Extra Corpor Technol       Date:  2014-03

7.  Occupational advice to help people return to work following lower limb arthroplasty: the OPAL intervention mapping study.

Authors:  Paul Baker; Carol Coole; Avril Drummond; Sayeed Khan; Catriona McDaid; Catherine Hewitt; Lucksy Kottam; Sarah Ronaldson; Elizabeth Coleman; David A McDonald; Fiona Nouri; Melanie Narayanasamy; Iain McNamara; Judith Fitch; Louise Thomson; Gerry Richardson; Amar Rangan
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 4.014

8.  Patients' Expectations Predict Surgery Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Charlotte J Auer; Julia A Glombiewski; Bettina K Doering; Alexander Winkler; Johannes A C Laferton; Elizabeth Broadbent; Winfried Rief
Journal:  Int J Behav Med       Date:  2016-02

9.  Urinary and sexual function after treatment with temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) in men with LUTS: 6-month interim results of the MT-06-study.

Authors:  Cosimo De Nunzio; Francesco Cantiello; Cristian Fiori; Fabio Crocerossa; Piero Tognoni; Daniele Amparore; Valeria Baldassarri; Javier Reinoso Elbers; Fernando Gomez Sancha; Francesco Porpiglia
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Validation of the SF-36 as a measure of postoperative recovery after colorectal surgery.

Authors:  Ioana Antonescu; Francesco Carli; Nancy E Mayo; Liane S Feldman
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-05-31       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.