Karen A Robinson1, Wesley E Davis2, Victor D Dinglas2, Pedro A Mendez-Tellez3, Anahita Rabiee2, Vineeth Sukrithan2, Ramakrishna Yalamanchilli2, Alison E Turnbull4, Dale M Needham5. 1. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1830 East Monument Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. Electronic address: krobin@jhmi.edu. 2. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1830 East Monument Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Outcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery (OACIS) Group, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1830 East Monument Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. 3. Outcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery (OACIS) Group, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1830 East Monument Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. 4. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1830 East Monument Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Outcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery (OACIS) Group, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1830 East Monument Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Epidemiology, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, 615 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. 5. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1830 East Monument Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Outcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery (OACIS) Group, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1830 East Monument Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is a growing number of studies evaluating the physical, cognitive, mental health, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes of adults surviving critical illness. However, there is little consensus on the most appropriate instruments to measure these outcomes. To inform the development of such consensus, we conducted a systematic review of the performance characteristics of instruments measuring physical, cognitive, mental health, and HRQOL outcomes in adult intensive care unit (ICU) survivors. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and The Cochrane Library in March 2015. We also conducted manual searches of reference lists of eligible studies and relevant review articles. Two people independently selected studies, completed data abstraction, and assessed the quality of eligible studies using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) initiative checklist. RESULTS: We identified 20 studies which explicitly evaluated measurement properties for 21 different instruments assessing outcomes in ICU survivors. Eleven of the instruments assessed quality of life, with few instruments assessing other domains. Of the nine measurement properties evaluated on the COSMIN checklist, six were assessed in <10% of the evaluations. Overall quality of eligible studies was generally poor to fair based on the COSMIN checklist. CONCLUSIONS: Although an increasing number of studies measure physical, cognitive, mental health, and HRQOL outcomes in adult ICU survivors, data on the measurement properties of such instruments are sparse and generally of poor to fair quality. Empirical analyses evaluating the performance of instruments in adult ICU survivors are needed to advance research in this field.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is a growing number of studies evaluating the physical, cognitive, mental health, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes of adults surviving critical illness. However, there is little consensus on the most appropriate instruments to measure these outcomes. To inform the development of such consensus, we conducted a systematic review of the performance characteristics of instruments measuring physical, cognitive, mental health, and HRQOL outcomes in adult intensive care unit (ICU) survivors. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and The Cochrane Library in March 2015. We also conducted manual searches of reference lists of eligible studies and relevant review articles. Two people independently selected studies, completed data abstraction, and assessed the quality of eligible studies using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) initiative checklist. RESULTS: We identified 20 studies which explicitly evaluated measurement properties for 21 different instruments assessing outcomes in ICU survivors. Eleven of the instruments assessed quality of life, with few instruments assessing other domains. Of the nine measurement properties evaluated on the COSMIN checklist, six were assessed in <10% of the evaluations. Overall quality of eligible studies was generally poor to fair based on the COSMIN checklist. CONCLUSIONS: Although an increasing number of studies measure physical, cognitive, mental health, and HRQOL outcomes in adult ICU survivors, data on the measurement properties of such instruments are sparse and generally of poor to fair quality. Empirical analyses evaluating the performance of instruments in adult ICU survivors are needed to advance research in this field.
Authors: Linda Denehy; Amy Nordon-Craft; Lara Edbrooke; Daniel Malone; Sue Berney; Margaret Schenkman; Marc Moss Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2014-10-16 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Beverley J Shea; Jeremy M Grimshaw; George A Wells; Maarten Boers; Neil Andersson; Candyce Hamel; Ashley C Porter; Peter Tugwell; David Moher; Lex M Bouter Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2007-02-15 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Dale M Needham; Kristin A Sepulveda; Victor D Dinglas; Caroline M Chessare; Lisa Aronson Friedman; Clifton O Bingham; Alison E Turnbull Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Alison E Turnbull; Kristin A Sepulveda; Victor D Dinglas; Caroline M Chessare; Clifton O Bingham; Dale M Needham Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Sumera R Ahmad; Alex D Tarabochia; Luann Budahn; Allison M Lemahieu; Brenda Anderson; Kirtivardhan Vashistha; Lioudmila Karnatovskaia; Ognjen Gajic Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-06-06
Authors: Monika C Kerckhoffs; Felicia F L Kosasi; Ivo W Soliman; Johannes J M van Delden; Olaf L Cremer; Dylan W de Lange; Arjen J C Slooter; Jozef Kesecioglu; Diederik van Dijk Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2019-03-06 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Denham S Ward; Anthony R Absalom; Leanne M Aitken; Michele C Balas; David L Brown; Lisa Burry; Elizabeth Colantuoni; Douglas Coursin; John W Devlin; Franklin Dexter; Robert H Dworkin; Talmage D Egan; Doug Elliott; Ingrid Egerod; Pamela Flood; Gilles L Fraser; Timothy D Girard; David Gozal; Ramona O Hopkins; John Kress; Mervyn Maze; Dale M Needham; Pratik Pandharipande; Richard Riker; Daniel I Sessler; Steven L Shafer; Yahya Shehabi; Claudia Spies; Lena S Sun; Avery Tung; Richard D Urman Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 9.296