Measurement properties of quality of life measurement instruments for infants, children and adolescents with eczema: protocol for a systematic review

Background: Eczema is a common chronic or chronically relapsing skin disease that has a substantial impact on quality of life (QoL). By means of a consensus-based process, the Harmonising Outcome Measures in Eczema (HOME) initiative has identified QoL as one of the four core outcome domains to be assessed in all eczema trials. Few measurement instruments exist to measure QoL in infants and children with eczema, but there is a great variability in both content and quality (for example, reliability and validity) of the instruments used, and it is not always clear if the best instrument is being used. Therefore, the aim of the proposed research is a comprehensive systematic assessment of the measurement properties of the existing measurement instruments that were developed and/or validated for the measurement of patient-reported QoL in infants and children with eczema. Methods/Design: This study is a systematic review of the measurement properties of patient-reported measures of QoL developed and/or validated for infants and children with eczema. Medline via PubMed and EMBASE will be searched using a selection of relevant search terms. Eligible studies will be primary empirical studies evaluating, describing, or comparing measurement properties of QoL instruments for infants and children with eczema. Eligibility assessment and data abstraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. Evidence tables will be generated for study characteristics, instrument characteristics, measurement properties, and interpretability. The adequacy of the measurement properties will be assessed using predefined criteria. Methodological quality of studies will be assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. A best evidence synthesis will be undertaken if more than one study has investigated a particular measurement property. Discussion: The proposed systematic review will produce a comprehensive assessment of measurement properties of existing QoL instruments in infants and children with eczema. We aim to identify one best currently available instrument to measure QoL in infants and/or children with eczema

Measurement properties of adult quality-of-life measurement instruments for eczema: protocol for a systematic review

Background Eczema is a common chronic or chronically relapsing skin disease that has a substantial impact on quality of life (QoL). By means of a consensus-based process, the Harmonising Outcome Measures in Eczema (HOME) initiative has identified QoL as one of the four core outcome domains to be assessed in all eczema trials (Allergy 67(9):1111-7, 2012). Various measurement instruments exist to measure QoL in adults with eczema, but there is a great variability in both content and quality (for example, reliability and validity) of the instruments used, and it is not always clear if the best instrument is being used. Therefore, the aim of the proposed research is a comprehensive systematic assessment of the measurement properties of the existing measurement instruments that were developed and/or validated for the measurement of patient-reported QoL in adults with eczema. Methods/Design This study is a systematic review of the measurement properties of patient-reported measures of QoL developed and/or validated for adults with eczema. Medline via PubMed and EMBASE will be searched using a selection of relevant search terms. Eligible studies will be primary empirical studies evaluating, describing, or comparing measurement properties of QoL instruments for adult patients with eczema. Eligibility assessment and data abstraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. Evidence tables will be generated for study characteristics, instrument characteristics, measurement properties, and interpretability. The quality of the measurement properties will be assessed using predefined criteria. Methodological quality of studies will be assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. A best evidence synthesis will be undertaken if more than one study has investigated a particular measurement property. Discussion The proposed systematic review will produce a comprehensive assessment of measurement properties of existing QoL instruments in adult patients with eczema. We aim to identify one best currently available instrument to measure QoL in eczema patients

The impact of non-traumatic hip and knee disorders on health-related quality of life as measured with the SF-36 or SF-12: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review is to summarize the available evidence on the impact of non-traumatic hip or knee disorders on health-related quality of life (HRQL), as measured with the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) or Short Form 12 Health Survey (SF-12), by comparing this with data from reference populations. METHODS: Studies were identified by an electronic search of the MEDLINE, PsychInfo and Cinahl databases. Studies with the following features were included: study population included patients with non-traumatic hip or knee disorders, the SF-36 or SF-12 was used as an outcome measure and mean scores on these HRQL measures were presented. Using mean HRQL scores from the selected studies and scores from reference populations, z-scores were computed. Pooled estimates were computed for subgroups of studies with similar patients in similar settings. RESULTS: A total of 40 studies met the inclusion criteria. Patients with non-traumatic hip and knee disorders scored up to 2.5 standard deviations (SDs) below reference population values, especially on the physical aspects of HRQL. Social and mental aspects were up to 1 SD below reference population values, especially in patients in clinical settings. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of non-traumatic hip or knee disorders on HRQL is substantial, especially on the physical aspects of HRQ

Measurement Properties of Visual Analogue Scale, Numeric Rating Scale, and Pain Severity Subscale of the Brief Pain Inventory in Patients With Low Back Pain:A Systematic Review

Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and Pain Severity subscale of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI-PS)] are the most frequently used instruments to measure pain intensity in low back pain (LBP). However, their measurement properties in this population have not been systematically reviewed. The goal of this study was to provide such systematic evidence synthesis. Six electronic sources (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SportDiscus, Google Scholar) were searched (July 2017). Studies assessing any measurement property in patients with non-specific LBP were included. Two reviewers independently screened articles and assessed risk of bias using the COSMIN checklist. For each measurement property: evidence quality was rated as high, moderate, low, or very low (GRADE approach); results were classified as sufficient, insufficient or inconsistent. Ten studies assessed the VAS, 13 the NRS, four the BPI-PS. The three instruments displayed low or very low quality evidence for content validity. High quality evidence was only available for NRS insufficient measurement error. Moderate evidence was available for: NRS inconsistent responsiveness, BPI-PS sufficient structural validity and internal consistency, and BPI-PS inconsistent construct validity. All VAS measurement properties were underpinned by no, low or very low quality evidence, likewise the other measurement properties of NRS and BPI-PS

Instruments to assess physical activity in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: a systematic review of measurement properties

SummaryObjectiveThere is no consensus on the best approach for measuring physical activity in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip or knee. The aims of this study were (1) to identify all physical activity measures that have been validated in patients with OA of the hip or knee and to systematically review their measurement properties, and (2) to give recommendations on which instrument is most suitable for what purpose.DesignA search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Sportdiscus (complete databases until November 10, 2010). Three reviewers independently evaluated the quality of the included studies, using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Subsequently, the reviewers independently evaluated the quality of the included physical activity instruments, using the recently developed QAPAQ checklist for appraising the qualitative attributes and measurement properties of physical activity questionnaires.ResultsNine studies were included, in which 12 measurement instruments were evaluated: five single-item rating scales, six multi-item questionnaires, and one pedometer. In general, the methodological quality of the studies was poor to moderate. Only the Lower-Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS) and the pedometer received positive ratings for content validity. The LEAS and Baecke questionnaire received positive ratings for reliability. The University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), the Tegner score, and the LEAS received positive ratings for construct validity. The Daily Activity Questionnaire (DAQ) received a positive rating for criterion validity. Responsiveness was not evaluated for any of the included instruments.ConclusionFor monitoring physical activity levels of populations the UCLA or LEAS seem most useful. For studies measuring physical activity as a risk factor for developing OA or as a protective factor against functional decline there is not enough evidence for any instrument to conclude that it has adequate measurement properties. For follow-up studies on wear in joint replacement patients we recommend to use accelerometers. However, more validation studies of adequate quality are needed for all included instruments

Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist

Background: The COSMIN checklist is a standardized tool for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties. It contains 9 boxes, each dealing with one measurement property, with 5-18 items per box about design aspects and statistical methods. Our aim was to develop a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist to calculate quality scores per measurement property when using the checklist in systematic reviews of measurement properties. Methods: The scoring system was developed based on discussions among experts and testing of the scoring system on 46 articles from a systematic review. Four response options were defined for each COSMIN item (excellent, good, fair, and poor). A quality score per measurement property is obtained by taking the lowest rating of any item in a box ("worst score counts"). Results: Specific criteria for excellent, good, fair, and poor quality for each COSMIN item are described. In defining the criteria, the "worst score counts" algorithm was taken into consideration. This means that only fatal flaws were defined as poor quality. The scores of the 46 articles show how the scoring system can be used to provide an overview of the methodological quality of studies included in a systematic review of measurement properties. Conclusions: Based on experience in testing this scoring system on 46 articles, the COSMIN checklist with the proposed scoring system seems to be a useful tool for assessing the methodological quality of studies included in systematic reviews of measurement properties. © The Author(s) 2011

Recommendations for exercise adherence measures in musculoskeletal settings : a systematic review and consensus meeting (protocol)

Background: Exercise programmes are frequently advocated for the management of musculoskeletal disorders; however, adherence is an important pre-requisite for their success. The assessment of exercise adherence requires the use of relevant and appropriate measures, but guidance for appropriate assessment does not exist. This research will identify and evaluate the quality and acceptability of all measures used to assess exercise adherence within a musculoskeletal setting, seeking to reach consensus for the most relevant and appropriate measures for application in research and/or clinical practice settings. Methods/design: There are two key stages to the proposed research. First, a systematic review of the quality and acceptability of measures used to assess exercise adherence in musculoskeletal disorders; second, a consensus meeting. The systematic review will be conducted in two phases and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to ensure a robust methodology. Phase one will identify all measures that have been used to assess exercise adherence in a musculoskeletal setting. Phase two will seek to identify published and unpublished evidence of the measurement and practical properties of identified measures. Study quality will be assessed against the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. A shortlist of best quality measures will be produced for consideration during stage two: a meeting of relevant stakeholders in the United Kingdom during which consensus on the most relevant and appropriate measures of exercise adherence for application in research and/or clinical practice settings will be sought. Discussion: This study will benefit clinicians who seek to evaluate patients’ levels of exercise adherence and those intending to undertake research, service evaluation, or audit relating to exercise adherence in the musculoskeletal field. The findings will impact upon new research studies which aim to understand the factors that predict adherence with exercise and which test different adherence-enhancing interventions. PROSPERO reference: CRD4201300621