S R Moonesinghe1, A I R Jackson2, O Boney3, N Stevenson4, M T V Chan5, T M Cook6, M Lane-Fall7, C Kalkman8, M D Neuman9, U Nilsson10, M Shulman11, P S Myles11. 1. UCL/UCLH Surgical Outcomes Research Centre, Centre for Perioperative Medicine, Department for Targeted Intervention, University College London, London, UK; Health Services Research Centre, National Institute for Academic Anaesthesia, Royal College of Anaesthetists, London, UK; National Institute for Health Research, Biomedical Research Centre, University College London Hospitals, London, UK. Electronic address: ramani.moonesinghe@nhs.net. 2. Anaesthesia and Critical Care Research Area, NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK; Integrative Physiology and Critical Illness Group, Clinical and Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. 3. UCL/UCLH Surgical Outcomes Research Centre, Centre for Perioperative Medicine, Department for Targeted Intervention, University College London, London, UK; Health Services Research Centre, National Institute for Academic Anaesthesia, Royal College of Anaesthetists, London, UK. 4. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Barnet General Hospital, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 5. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Chinese University of Hong Kong, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. 6. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK; School of Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. 7. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Penn Center for Perioperative Outcomes Research and Transformation, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 8. Division of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University Medical Centre, Utrecht, the Netherlands. 9. Leonard David Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 10. Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 11. Department of Anaesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient-centred outcomes are increasingly used in perioperative clinical trials. The Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative aims to define which measures should be used in future research to facilitate comparison between studies and to enable robust evidence synthesis. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to create a longlist of patient satisfaction, health-related quality of life, functional status, patient well-being, and life-impact measures for consideration. A three-stage Delphi consensus process involving 89 international experts was then conducted in order to refine this list into a set of recommendations. RESULTS: The literature review yielded six patient-satisfaction measures, seven generic health-related quality-of-life measures, eight patient well-being measures, five functional-status measures, and five life-impact measures for consideration. The Delphi response rates were 92%, 87%, and 100% for Rounds 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Three additional measures were added during the Delphi process as a result of contributions from the StEP group members. Firm recommendations have been made about one health-related quality-of-life measure (EuroQol 5 Dimension, five-level version with visual analogue scale), one functional-status measure (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule version 2.0, 12-question version), and one life-impact measure (days alive and out of hospital at 30 days after surgery). Recommendations with caveats have been made about the Bauer patient-satisfaction measure and two life-impact measures (days alive and out of hospital at 1 yr after surgery, and discharge destination). CONCLUSIONS: Several patient-centred outcome measures have been recommended for use in future perioperative studies. We suggest that every clinical study should consider using at least one patient-centred outcome within a suite of endpoints.
BACKGROUND:Patient-centred outcomes are increasingly used in perioperative clinical trials. The Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative aims to define which measures should be used in future research to facilitate comparison between studies and to enable robust evidence synthesis. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to create a longlist of patient satisfaction, health-related quality of life, functional status, patient well-being, and life-impact measures for consideration. A three-stage Delphi consensus process involving 89 international experts was then conducted in order to refine this list into a set of recommendations. RESULTS: The literature review yielded six patient-satisfaction measures, seven generic health-related quality-of-life measures, eight patient well-being measures, five functional-status measures, and five life-impact measures for consideration. The Delphi response rates were 92%, 87%, and 100% for Rounds 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Three additional measures were added during the Delphi process as a result of contributions from the StEP group members. Firm recommendations have been made about one health-related quality-of-life measure (EuroQol 5 Dimension, five-level version with visual analogue scale), one functional-status measure (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule version 2.0, 12-question version), and one life-impact measure (days alive and out of hospital at 30 days after surgery). Recommendations with caveats have been made about the Bauer patient-satisfaction measure and two life-impact measures (days alive and out of hospital at 1 yr after surgery, and discharge destination). CONCLUSIONS: Several patient-centred outcome measures have been recommended for use in future perioperative studies. We suggest that every clinical study should consider using at least one patient-centred outcome within a suite of endpoints.
Authors: Sebastian Roth; René M'Pembele; Anthony Nucaro; Alexandra Stroda; Theresa Tenge; Giovanna Lurati Buse; Stephan U Sixt; Ralf Westenfeld; Philipp Rellecke; Igor Tudorache; Markus W Hollmann; Hug Aubin; Payam Akhyari; Artur Lichtenberg; Ragnar Huhn; Udo Boeken Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-07-03 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Pui Lam Polly Fung; Vivian Nga Man Lau; Floria Fung Ng; Wing Wa Leung; Tony Wing Chung Mak; Anna Lee Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Daniel Azoulay; Emilio Ramos; Margarida Casellas-Robert; Chady Salloum; Laura Lladó; Roy Nadler; Juli Busquets; Celia Caula-Freixa; Kristel Mils; Santiago Lopez-Ben; Joan Figueras; Chetana Lim Journal: JHEP Rep Date: 2020-10-08
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
Authors: Jamie L Waterland; Orla McCourt; Lara Edbrooke; Catherine L Granger; Hilmy Ismail; Bernhard Riedel; Linda Denehy Journal: Front Surg Date: 2021-03-19
Authors: Daniel Steffens; Hilmy Ismail; Linda Denehy; Paula R Beckenkamp; Michael Solomon; Cherry Koh; Jenna Bartyn; Neil Pillinger Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Ulla Plenge; Romy Parker; Shamiela Davids; Gareth L Davies; Zahnne Fullerton; Lindsay Gray; Penelope Groenewald; Refqah Isaacs; Ntambue Kauta; Frederik M Louw; Andile Mazibuko; David M North; Marc Nortje; Glen M Nunes; Neo Pebane; Chantal Rajah; John Roos; Paul Ryan; Winlecia V September; Heidi Shanahan; Ruth E Siebritz; Rian W Smit; Simon Sombili; Alexandra Torborg; Johan F van der Merwe; Nico van der Westhuizen; Bruce Biccard Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2020-11-05 Impact factor: 2.362