Jilda N Vargus-Adams1, Lauren K Martin. 1. Departments of Pediatrics and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati School of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA. jilda.vargus-adams@cchmc.org
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Vargus-Adams JN, Martin LK. Measuring what matters in cerebral palsy: a breadth of important domains and outcome measures. OBJECTIVE: To establish domains of importance for evaluating therapeutic effects in childhood cerebral palsy (CP) and the best means of evaluating those domains. DESIGN: Delphi iterative survey. SETTING: Tertiary pediatric hospital with assessments conducted via mail or Internet. PARTICIPANTS: Youth with CP (n=21), parents of children with CP (n=23), and medical professionals (n=39). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Identification of "the things you find most important to consider when you evaluate the effects of an intervention for yourself/your child/your patient with cerebral palsy" as domains of concern, followed by the best outcome measures to assess each of the domains, including preference rankings of those measures. RESULTS: Eight domains of importance were identified: impairment, general health, gross motor skills, self-care/fine motor skills, speech/communication, integration/participation, quality of life, and caregiver issues. All domains were viewed as important with no clear demarcation to allow reduction in number. Only quality of life emerged as being most important. Medical professionals suggested 10 to 27 different outcome measures for assessing each domain. Few of these measures, including the Gross Motor Function Measure and the Cerebral Palsy Quality of Life Questionnaire, were broadly endorsed by the medical professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Parents, youth, and medical professionals identify a wide range of arenas that they would like to see impacted by interventions for CP. These arenas can be consolidated into 8 domains. Although many outcome measures are available to evaluate these domains, few of the measures are widely preferred. Further work may determine optimal assessment strategies and provide guidance for therapeutic decisions.
UNLABELLED: Vargus-Adams JN, Martin LK. Measuring what matters in cerebral palsy: a breadth of important domains and outcome measures. OBJECTIVE: To establish domains of importance for evaluating therapeutic effects in childhood cerebral palsy (CP) and the best means of evaluating those domains. DESIGN: Delphi iterative survey. SETTING: Tertiary pediatric hospital with assessments conducted via mail or Internet. PARTICIPANTS: Youth with CP (n=21), parents of children with CP (n=23), and medical professionals (n=39). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Identification of "the things you find most important to consider when you evaluate the effects of an intervention for yourself/your child/your patient with cerebral palsy" as domains of concern, followed by the best outcome measures to assess each of the domains, including preference rankings of those measures. RESULTS: Eight domains of importance were identified: impairment, general health, gross motor skills, self-care/fine motor skills, speech/communication, integration/participation, quality of life, and caregiver issues. All domains were viewed as important with no clear demarcation to allow reduction in number. Only quality of life emerged as being most important. Medical professionals suggested 10 to 27 different outcome measures for assessing each domain. Few of these measures, including the Gross Motor Function Measure and the Cerebral Palsy Quality of Life Questionnaire, were broadly endorsed by the medical professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Parents, youth, and medical professionals identify a wide range of arenas that they would like to see impacted by interventions for CP. These arenas can be consolidated into 8 domains. Although many outcome measures are available to evaluate these domains, few of the measures are widely preferred. Further work may determine optimal assessment strategies and provide guidance for therapeutic decisions.
Authors: Paula R Williamson; Douglas G Altman; Heather Bagley; Karen L Barnes; Jane M Blazeby; Sara T Brookes; Mike Clarke; Elizabeth Gargon; Sarah Gorst; Nicola Harman; Jamie J Kirkham; Angus McNair; Cecilia A C Prinsen; Jochen Schmitt; Caroline B Terwee; Bridget Young Journal: Trials Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Allison Tong; Susan Samuel; Michael Zappitelli; Allison Dart; Susan Furth; Allison Eddy; Jaap Groothoff; Nicholas J A Webb; Hui-Kim Yap; Detlef Bockenhauer; Aditi Sinha; Stephen I Alexander; Stuart L Goldstein; Debbie S Gipson; Camilla S Hanson; Nicole Evangelidis; Sally Crowe; Tess Harris; Brenda R Hemmelgarn; Braden Manns; John Gill; Peter Tugwell; Wim Van Biesen; David C Wheeler; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Jonathan C Craig Journal: Trials Date: 2016-08-12 Impact factor: 2.279