Lily R Mundy1, H Catherine Miller2, Anne F Klassen3, Stefan J Cano4, Andrea L Pusic5. 1. College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, USA. 2. School of Medicine, University of Washington, 4333 Brooklyn Avenue Northeast, Seattle, WA, USA. 3. Departments of Pediatrics and Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada. 4. Clinical Neurology Research Group, Peninsula Schools of Medicine and Dentistry, Plymouth University, Drake Circus, Plymouth, Devon, UK. 5. Plastic and Reconstructive Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. PusicA@mskcc.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are of growing importance in research and clinical care and may be used as primary outcomes or as compliments to traditional surgical outcomes. In assessing the impact of surgical and traumatic scars, PROs are often the most meaningful. To assess outcomes from the patient perspective, rigorously developed and validated PRO instruments are essential. METHODS: The authors conducted a systematic literature review to identify PRO instruments developed and/or validated for patients with surgical and/or non-burn traumatic scars. Identified instruments were assessed for content, development process, and validation under recommended guidelines for PRO instrument development. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 6534 articles. After review, we identified four PRO instruments meeting inclusion criteria: patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS), bock quality of life questionnaire for patients with keloid and hypertrophic scarring (Bock), patient scar assessment questionnaire (PSAQ), and patient-reported impact of scars measure (PRISM). Common concepts measured were symptoms and psychosocial well-being. Only PSAQ had a dedicated appearance domain. Qualitative data were used to inform content for the PSAQ and PRISM, and a modern psychometric approach (Rasch Measurement Theory) was used to develop PRISM and to test POSAS. Overall, PRISM demonstrated the most rigorous design and validation process, however, was limited by the lack of a dedicated appearance domain. CONCLUSIONS: PRO instruments to evaluate outcomes in scars exist but vary in terms of concepts measured and psychometric soundness. This review discusses the strengths and weaknesses of existing instruments, highlighting the need for future scar-focused PRO instrument development. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
BACKGROUND:Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are of growing importance in research and clinical care and may be used as primary outcomes or as compliments to traditional surgical outcomes. In assessing the impact of surgical and traumatic scars, PROs are often the most meaningful. To assess outcomes from the patient perspective, rigorously developed and validated PRO instruments are essential. METHODS: The authors conducted a systematic literature review to identify PRO instruments developed and/or validated for patients with surgical and/or non-burn traumatic scars. Identified instruments were assessed for content, development process, and validation under recommended guidelines for PRO instrument development. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 6534 articles. After review, we identified four PRO instruments meeting inclusion criteria: patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS), bock quality of life questionnaire for patients with keloid and hypertrophic scarring (Bock), patientscar assessment questionnaire (PSAQ), and patient-reported impact of scars measure (PRISM). Common concepts measured were symptoms and psychosocial well-being. Only PSAQ had a dedicated appearance domain. Qualitative data were used to inform content for the PSAQ and PRISM, and a modern psychometric approach (Rasch Measurement Theory) was used to develop PRISM and to test POSAS. Overall, PRISM demonstrated the most rigorous design and validation process, however, was limited by the lack of a dedicated appearance domain. CONCLUSIONS: PRO instruments to evaluate outcomes in scars exist but vary in terms of concepts measured and psychometric soundness. This review discusses the strengths and weaknesses of existing instruments, highlighting the need for future scar-focused PRO instrument development. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Authors: Thomas G Weiser; Scott E Regenbogen; Katherine D Thompson; Alex B Haynes; Stuart R Lipsitz; William R Berry; Atul A Gawande Journal: Lancet Date: 2008-06-24 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Benjamin C Brown; Stephen P McKenna; Mattea Solomon; Jeanette Wilburn; Duncan A McGrouther; Ardeshir Bayat Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Lieneke J Draaijers; Fenike R H Tempelman; Yvonne A M Botman; Wim E Tuinebreijer; Esther Middelkoop; Robert W Kreis; Paul P M van Zuijlen Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Lidwine B Mokkink; Caroline B Terwee; Donald L Patrick; Jordi Alonso; Paul W Stratford; Dirk L Knol; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Thomas Radulesco; Julien Mancini; Martin Penicaud; Jean-Jacques Grob; Marie-Aleth Richard; Patrick Dessi; Nausicaa Malissen; Justin Michel Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-01-03 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Michelle E Carrière; Kelly A A Kwa; Louise E M de Haas; Anouk Pijpe; Zephanie Tyack; Johannes C F Ket; Paul P M van Zuijlen; Henrica C W de Vet; Lidwine B Mokkink Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2019-09-30
Authors: Ji-Cheng Hsieh; Amanda L Maisel-Campbell; Chitang J Joshi; Eric Zielinski; Robert D Galiano Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2021-04-15
Authors: Anne F Klassen; Natalia Ziolkowski; Lily R Mundy; H Catherine Miller; Alison McIlvride; Allison DiLaura; Joel Fish; Andrea L Pusic Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2018-04-24