Mark A Shulman1, Paul S Myles, Matthew T V Chan, David R McIlroy, Sophie Wallace, Jennie Ponsford. 1. From the Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Alfred Hospital and Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (M.A.S., P.S.M., D.R.M., S.W.); Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (M.T.V.C.); and Monash-Epworth Rehabilitation Research Centre, Epworth Hospital and Monash University, Richmond, Victoria, Australia (J.P.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Survival and freedom from disability are arguably the most important patient-centered outcomes after surgery, but it is unclear how postoperative disability should be measured. The authors thus evaluated the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in a surgical population. METHODS: The authors examined the psychometric properties of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in a diverse cohort of 510 surgical patients. The authors assessed clinical acceptability, validity, reliability, and responsiveness up to 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: Criterion and convergent validity of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 were supported by good correlation with the 40-item quality of recovery scale at 30 days after surgery (r = -0.70) and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery with physical functioning (The Katz index of independence in Activities of Daily Living; r = -0.70, r = -0.60, and rho = -0.47); quality of life (EQ-5D; r = -0.57, -0.60, and -0.52); and pain interference scores (modified Brief Pain Inventory Short Form; r = 0.72, 0.74, and 0.81) (all P < 0.0005). Construct validity was supported by increased hospital stay (6.9 vs. 5.3 days, P = 0.008) and increased day 30 complications (20% vs. 11%, P = 0.042) in patients with new disability. There was excellent internal consistency with Cronbach's α and split-half coefficients greater than 0.90 at all time points (all P < 0.0005). Responsiveness was excellent with effect sizes of 3.4, 3.0, and 1.0 at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 is a clinically acceptable, valid, reliable, and responsive instrument for measuring postoperative disability in a diverse surgical population. Its use as an endpoint in future perioperative studies can provide outcome data that are meaningful to clinicians and patients alike.
BACKGROUND: Survival and freedom from disability are arguably the most important patient-centered outcomes after surgery, but it is unclear how postoperative disability should be measured. The authors thus evaluated the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in a surgical population. METHODS: The authors examined the psychometric properties of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in a diverse cohort of 510 surgical patients. The authors assessed clinical acceptability, validity, reliability, and responsiveness up to 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: Criterion and convergent validity of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 were supported by good correlation with the 40-item quality of recovery scale at 30 days after surgery (r = -0.70) and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery with physical functioning (The Katz index of independence in Activities of Daily Living; r = -0.70, r = -0.60, and rho = -0.47); quality of life (EQ-5D; r = -0.57, -0.60, and -0.52); and pain interference scores (modified Brief Pain Inventory Short Form; r = 0.72, 0.74, and 0.81) (all P < 0.0005). Construct validity was supported by increased hospital stay (6.9 vs. 5.3 days, P = 0.008) and increased day 30 complications (20% vs. 11%, P = 0.042) in patients with new disability. There was excellent internal consistency with Cronbach's α and split-half coefficients greater than 0.90 at all time points (all P < 0.0005). Responsiveness was excellent with effect sizes of 3.4, 3.0, and 1.0 at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 is a clinically acceptable, valid, reliable, and responsive instrument for measuring postoperative disability in a diverse surgical population. Its use as an endpoint in future perioperative studies can provide outcome data that are meaningful to clinicians and patients alike.
Authors: Carol L Hodgson; Andrew A Udy; Michael Bailey; Jonathan Barrett; Rinaldo Bellomo; Tracey Bucknall; Belinda J Gabbe; Alisa M Higgins; Theodore J Iwashyna; Julian Hunt-Smith; Lynne J Murray; Paul S Myles; Jennie Ponsford; David Pilcher; Craig Walker; Meredith Young; D J Cooper Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2017-05-22 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Karon F Cook; Benjamin D Schalet; Michael A Kallen; Joshua P Rutsohn; David Cella Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-04-18 Impact factor: 4.147
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