Literature DB >> 22415657

What are the best outcome measures when assessing treatments for LUTD?--achieving the most out of outcome evaluation: ICI-RS 2011.

N Cotterill1, H Goldman, Con Kelleher, Zoe Kopp, Andrea Tubaro, Linda Brubaker.   

Abstract

A think tank was convened at the third ICI-RS meeting held in the UK, June 2011, to consider the best outcome measures when assessing treatments for lower urinary tract dysfunction (LUTD). Given the vast array of measures available a focus on questionnaires was decided upon, which continued to highlight a plethora of available tools. The decision was therefore taken to approach this topic from an alternative perspective and instead ask the audience of gathered experts in this field to consider, "What we need to ask as a minimum in order to capture the most fundamental parameters when evaluating new treatments for LUTD?" Discussions highlighted the need for inclusion of a global measure in all outcome evaluations in order to increase comparability between different treatment evaluations and different populations. More specific categories of evaluation identified were: treatment satisfaction, symptom quantification, health related quality of life and adverse events. Further optional components were identified for inclusion where relevant, such as health economic, goal setting and psychosocial evaluation. A "Minimum Outcome Set for Testing (MOST)" was therefore proposed by selecting a health outcome measure from each category while not being prescriptive about specific outcome measurement selection. The 'MOST' toolkit is therefore proposed to promote standardized evaluation in this field and represents a useful starting point for further consideration of this concept.
Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22415657     DOI: 10.1002/nau.22210

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn        ISSN: 0733-2467            Impact factor:   2.696


  4 in total

1.  CUA guideline on adult overactive bladder.

Authors:  Jacques Corcos; Mikolaj Przydacz; Lysanne Campeau; Gary Gray; Duane Hickling; Christiane Honeine; Sidney B Radomski; Lynn Stothers; Adrian Wagg; Frcp Lond
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Item bank development, calibration and validation for patient-reported outcomes in female urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Vivian W Sung; James W Griffith; Rebecca G Rogers; Christina A Raker; Melissa A Clark
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Reasons for dissatisfaction ten years after TVT procedure.

Authors:  Thomas Aigmueller; Vesna Bjelic-Radisic; Julia Kargl; Susanne Hinterholzer; Rene Laky; Gerda Trutnovsky; Vassiliki Kolovetsiou-Kreiner; Karl Tamussino
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Validation of a patient reported outcome questionnaire for assessing success of endoscopic prostatectomy.

Authors:  Tania Hossack; Henry Woo
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2014-12-30
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.