Outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses of appendicitis treatments in children: a systematic review

Background: Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. Despite this, there is no core outcome set (COS) described for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children with appendicitis and hence no consensus regarding outcome selection, definition and reporting. We aimed to identify outcomes currently reported in studies of paediatric appendicitis. / Methods: Using a defined, sensitive search strategy, we identified RCTs and systematic reviews (SRs) of treatment interventions in children with appendicitis. Included studies were all in English and investigated the effect of one or more treatment interventions in children with acute appendicitis or undergoing appendicectomy for presumed acute appendicitis. Studies were reviewed and data extracted by two reviewers. Primary (if defined) and all other outcomes were recorded and assigned to the core areas ‘Death’, ‘Pathophysiological Manifestations’, ‘Life Impact’, ‘Resource Use’ and ‘Adverse Events’, using OMERACT Filter 2.0. / Results: A total of 63 studies met the inclusion criteria reporting outcomes from 51 RCTs and nine SRs. Only 25 RCTs and four SRs defined a primary outcome. A total of 115 unique and different outcomes were identified. RCTs reported a median of nine outcomes each (range 1 to 14). The most frequently reported outcomes were wound infection (43 RCTs, nine SRs), intra-peritoneal abscess (41 RCTs, seven SRs) and length of stay (35 RCTs, six SRs) yet all three were reported in just 25 RCTs and five SRs. Common outcomes had multiple different definitions or were frequently not defined. Although outcomes were reported within all core areas, just one RCT and no SR reported outcomes for all core areas. Outcomes assigned to the ‘Death’ and ‘Life Impact’ core areas were reported least frequently (in six and 15 RCTs respectively). / Conclusions: There is a wide heterogeneity in the selection and definition of outcomes in paediatric appendicitis, and little overlap in outcomes used across studies. A paucity of studies report patient relevant outcomes within the ‘Life Impact’ core area. These factors preclude meaningful evidence synthesis, and pose challenges to designing prospective clinical trials and cohort studies. The development of a COS for paediatric appendicitis is warranted

A patient-prioritized ability assessment in haemophilia: the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure

Assessment of musculoskeletal function in individuals with haemophilia has been attempted with clinimetric instruments, which use predetermined domains for assessing the same. This study introduces the application of an instrument, the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), which is an open‐ended questionnaire that allows patients to prioritize their needs and rate their performance in different tasks of daily living as well as their satisfaction in performing them. To study the utility of COPM in evaluating the musculoskeletal functional status of patients with haemophilia and to assess its effectiveness in planning individualized management plans for them. COPM was administered to 67 individuals with haemophilia aged 10–55 years and the data were compared with functional deficits identified through FISH (Functional Independence Score for Haemophilia). A total of 31 performance difficulties in the areas of self‐care (62%), productivity (21%) and leisure (17%) were identified by COPM. All eight domains of FISH were identified in COPM as problems in self‐care. In addition to these, COPM identified problems in the areas of productivity and leisure. In 78% of the responses on COPM, there was concordance between the performance and satisfaction scores. However, there was discordance between the two in the remaining 22% of responses. COPM is a useful tool for assessment of musculoskeletal dysfunction in haemophilia. It provides a greater insight into the needs of each patient and helps in planning individualized intervention strategies

Psychometric analysis of the functional independence score in haemophilia (FISH)

Joint morbidity in haemophilia has traditionally been measured using clinical and radiological scores. There have been no reliable, validated tools for the assessment of functional independence in persons with haemophilia till recently. The Functional Independence Score in Haemophilia (FISH) has been developed as a performance based assessment tool to address this need. The FISH is designed to measure the patient’s independence in performing activities of daily living (grooming and eating, bathing and dressing), transfers (chair and floor), and mobility (walking, step climbing and running). On assessment of its psychometric properties in 63 patients with haemophilia (mean age 14 years), FISH was found to have good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha of 0.85). It had moderate correlation with the World Federation of Hemophilia clinical score (r = −0.61), and a correlation with the Pettersson score of −0.38. It had good correlation with other self‐rated functional scores, such as the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (r = −0.75); the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (r = −0.66) and the Haemophilia Activities List (HAL) (r = −0.66). It had good reliability with a pooled intra class correlation of 0.98. On assessing responsiveness following treatment of flexion deformities of the knee in 12 patients, the FISH showed significant changes in the score with a standardized responsiveness mean of −1.93. In conclusion, the FISH was found to be a reliable and valid tool with good internal consistency and responsiveness to therapy, for the assessment of functional independence in persons with haemophilia

Recent developments in clinimetric instruments

Assessment of impairment and function is essential in order to monitor joint status and evaluate therapeutic interventions in patients with haemophilia. The improvements in the treatment of haemophilia have required the development of more sensitive tools to detect the more minor dysfunctions that may now be apparent. This paper outlines some of the recent developments in this field. The Haemophilia Joint Health Score (HJHS) provides a systematic and robust measure of joint impairment. The MRI Scoring System has been designed to provide a comprehensive scoring system combining both progressive and additive scales. The Functional Independence Score for Haemophilia (FISH) has been developed to assess performance of functional activities and can be used in conjunction with the Haemophilia Activities List (HAL) which provides a self report measure of function. It is recommended that both measures are evaluated as these tools measure different constructs. Further refinement and testing of the psychometric properties of all of these tools is in progress. More widespread use of these tools will enable the sharing of data across the world so promoting best practice and ultimately enhancing patient car

Recent developments in clinimetric instruments

Assessment of impairment and function is essential in order to monitor joint status and evaluate therapeutic interventions in patients with haemophilia. The improvements in the treatment of haemophilia have required the development of more sensitive tools to detect the more minor dysfunctions that may now be apparent. This paper outlines some of the recent developments in this field. The Haemophilia Joint Health Score (HJHS) provides a systematic and robust measure of joint impairment. The MRI Scoring System has been designed to provide a comprehensive scoring system combining both progressive and additive scales. The Functional Independence Score for Haemophilia (FISH) has been developed to assess performance of functional activities and can be used in conjunction with the Haemophilia Activities List (HAL) which provides a self report measure of function. It is recommended that both measures are evaluated as these tools measure different constructs. Further refinement and testing of the psychometric properties of all of these tools is in progress. More widespread use of these tools will enable the sharing of data across the world so promoting best practice and ultimately enhancing patient care