Literature DB >> 24879142

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

Ioana Antonescu1, Francesco Carli, Nancy E Mayo, Liane S Feldman.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Surgery is evolving, and new techniques are introduced to improve "recovery." Postoperative recovery is complex, and evaluating the effectiveness of surgical innovations requires assessment of patient-reported outcomes. The Short-Form-36 (SF-36), a generic health-related quality of life questionnaire, is the most commonly used instrument in this context. The objective of this study was to contribute evidence for the validity of the SF-36 as a metric of postoperative recovery.
METHODS: Data from 128 patients undergoing planned colorectal surgery at one university hospital between 2005 and 2010 were analyzed. In the absence of a gold standard, the responsiveness and construct validity (known groups and convergent) of the SF-36 were evaluated. Standardized response means were computed for the former and non-parametric tests were used to assess the statistical significance of the changes observed. Multiple linear regression was used to determine whether the SF-36 discriminates between patients with versus without complications and between laparoscopic and open surgery (known groups); correlations between the SF-36 and the 6-min walk test, a measure of functional walking capacity (convergent) was investigated with Spearman's rank correlation.
RESULTS: The SF-36 was sensitive to clinically important changes. Scores on six of eight domains and the physical component summary score deteriorated postoperatively (SRM 0.86 for the PCS, p < 0.01) and improved to baseline thereafter. Patients with complications had significantly lower scores on five SF-36 domains (with differences from -9 (-18, -1), p = 0.04 to -18 (-32, -2), p = 0.03), and scores on all subscales were lower than those in a healthy population (p < 0.01 to p = 0.04). The SF-36 did not differentiate between laparoscopic and open surgery. Physical functioning scores correlated with 6MWT distance at 1 and 2 months (Spearman's r = 0.31 and 0.36, p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: The SF-36 is responsive to expected physiological changes in the postoperative period, demonstrates construct validity, and thus constitutes a valid measure of postoperative recovery after planned colorectal surgery. The SF-36 did not, however, discriminate between recovery after laparoscopic and open surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24879142     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-014-3577-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  43 in total

1.  Laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colon cancer.

Authors:  David R Urbach
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-04-17       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Spinal analgesia for laparoscopic colonic resection using an enhanced recovery after surgery programme: better analgesia, but no benefits on postoperative recovery: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  M Wongyingsinn; G Baldini; B Stein; P Charlebois; S Liberman; F Carli
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 9.166

3.  ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2002-07-01       Impact factor: 21.405

4.  Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life.

Authors:  Ross D Crosby; Ronette L Kolotkin; G Rhys Williams
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Stefan Maartense; Michalda S Dunker; J Frederick Slors; Miguel A Cuesta; Dirk J Gouma; Sander J van Deventer; Ad A van Bodegraven; Willem A Bemelman
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 6.  Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods.

Authors:  Anne G Copay; Brian R Subach; Steven D Glassman; David W Polly; Thomas C Schuler
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2007-04-02       Impact factor: 4.166

Review 7.  Systematic review on recovery specific quality-of-life instruments.

Authors:  Kirsten B Kluivers; Ingrid Riphagen; Mark E Vierhout; Hans A M Brölmann; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 3.982

8.  The short form-36 health survey questionnaire in spine surgery.

Authors:  M Grevitt; R Khazim; J Webb; R Mulholland; J Shepperd
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1997-01

9.  Canadian normative data for the SF-36 health survey. Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study Research Group.

Authors:  W M Hopman; T Towheed; T Anastassiades; A Tenenhouse; S Poliquin; C Berger; L Joseph; J P Brown; T M Murray; J D Adachi; D A Hanley; E Papadimitropoulos
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2000-08-08       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Measuring postoperative recovery: what are clinically meaningful differences?

Authors:  Ioana Antonescu; Susan Scott; Tung T Tran; Nancy E Mayo; Liane S Feldman
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2014-03-15       Impact factor: 3.982

View more
  14 in total

1.  The six-minute walk test as a measure of postoperative recovery after colorectal resection: further examination of its measurement properties.

Authors:  Nicolò Pecorelli; Julio F Fiore; Chelsia Gillis; Rashami Awasthi; Benjamin Mappin-Kasirer; Petru Niculiseanu; Gerald M Fried; Francesco Carli; Liane S Feldman
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Evidence or eminence in abdominal surgery: recent improvements in perioperative care.

Authors:  Josefin Segelman; Jonas Nygren
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-11-28       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Long-term Quality of Life and Gastrointestinal Functional Outcomes After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Casey J Allen; Danny Yakoub; Francisco Igor Macedo; Austin R Dosch; Jessica Brosch; Vikas Dudeja; Ronda Ayala; Nipun B Merchant
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Health-related quality of life and oncologic outcomes after surgery in older adults with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Andrew M Blakely; Dayana Chanson; F Lennie Wong; Oliver S Eng; Stephen M Sentovich; Kurt A Melstrom; Lily L Lai; Yuman Fong; Virginia Sun
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Construct validity and responsiveness of the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) as a measure of recovery after colorectal surgery.

Authors:  Makena Pook; Hiba Elhaj; Charbel El Kefraoui; Saba Balvardi; Nicolo Pecorelli; Lawrence Lee; Liane S Feldman; Julio F Fiore
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Development of a patient-reported outcome measure of recovery after abdominal surgery: a hypothesized conceptual framework.

Authors:  Roshni Alam; Sabrina M Figueiredo; Saba Balvardi; Bénédicte Nauche; Tara Landry; Lawrence Lee; Nancy E Mayo; Liane S Feldman; Julio F Fiore
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Patient-reported outcome measures to evaluate postoperative quality of life in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Margot E Lodge; Chris Moran; Adam D J Sutton; Hui-Ching Lee; Jugdeep K Dhesi; Nadine E Andrew; Darshini R Ayton; David J Hunter-Smith; Velandai K Srikanth; David A Snowdon
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2022-01-22       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  What Are the Minimum Clinically Important Differences in SF-36 Scores in Patients with Orthopaedic Oncologic Conditions?

Authors:  Koichi Ogura; Mohamed A Yakoub; Alexander B Christ; Tomohiro Fujiwara; Zarko Nikolic; Patrick J Boland; John H Healey
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 4.755

9.  Emergency total proctocolectomy in an uninsured patient with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis Syndrome and acute lower gastrointestinal hemorrhage in a community hospital: A case report.

Authors:  Rodolfo J Oviedo; Bruce M Dixon; Chase W Sofiak
Journal:  Int J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2016-07-30

10.  Prospective randomised controlled trial using the REthinking Clinical Trials (REaCT) platform and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) to compare no preparation versus preoperative oral antibiotics alone for surgical site infection rates in elective colon surgery: a protocol.

Authors:  Sameer S Apte; Husein Moloo; Ahwon Jeong; Michelle Liu; Lisa Vandemeer; Kathryn Suh; Kednapa Thavorn; Dean A Fergusson; Mark Clemons; Rebecca C Auer
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-09       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.