From qualitative data to a measurement instrument: A clarification and elaboration of choices made in the development of the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) 3.0

被引:7
作者
Carriere, M. E. [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ,5 ,11 ]
Tyack, Z. [6 ]
Westerman, M. J. [1 ,7 ]
Pleat, J. [8 ]
Pijpe, A. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
van Zuijlen, P. P. M. [2 ,3 ,4 ,9 ]
de Vet, H. C. W. [1 ,10 ]
Mokkink, L. B. [1 ,10 ]
机构
[1] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Dept Epidemiol & Data Sci, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Red Cross Hosp, Burn Ctr, Beverwijk, Netherlands
[3] Red Cross Hosp, Dept Plast Reconstruct & Hand Surg, Beverwijk, Netherlands
[4] Amsterdam UMC, Locat VUmc, Amsterdam Movement Sci, Dept Plast Reconstruct & Hand Surg, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[5] Assoc Dutch Burn Ctr, Beverwijk, Netherlands
[6] Univ Queensland, Child Hlth Res Ctr, Brisbane, Australia
[7] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Div Life Sci, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[8] North Bristol NHS Trust, Dept Plast & Reconstruct Surg, Bristol, England
[9] Univ Amsterdam, Emma Childrens Hosp, Pediat Surg Ctr, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[10] Amsterdam Publ Hlth Res Inst, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[11] Vondellaan 13, NL-1942 LE Beverwijk, Netherlands
关键词
POSAS; Scar quality; Scar assessment; Content validity; Instrument development; PROM; RATING-SCALES; IMPACT; TOOL;
D O I
10.1016/j.burns.2023.02.009
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Purpose: To clarify and elaborate on the choices that were made in the development of the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale 3.0 (POSAS 3.0), based upon the rich information obtained from patients during focus groups and pilot tests.Methods: The discussions described in this paper are a reflection of the focus group study and pilot tests that were conducted in order to develop the Patient Scale of the POSAS3.0. The focus groups took place in the Netherlands and Australia and included 45 participants. Pilot tests were performed with 15 participants in Australia, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.Results: We discussed the selection, wording and merging of 17 included items. Additionally, the reason for exclusion of 23 characteristics are given.Conclusion: Based upon the unique and rich material of patient input obtained, two versions of the Patient Scale of the POSAS3.0 were developed: the Generic version, and the Linear scar version. The discussions and decisions taken during the development are informative for a good understanding of the POSAS 3.0 and are indispensable as a background for future translations and cross-cultural adaptations.(c) 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:1541 / 1556
页数:16
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
Braun V, 2006, Qualitative Research in Psychology, V3, P77, DOI [10.1191/1478088706qp063oa, DOI 10.1191/1478088706QP063OA, DOI 10.1080/10875549.2021.1929659]
[2]   The lived experience and quality of life with burn scarring-The results from a large-scale online survey [J].
Brewin, M. P. ;
Homer, S. J. .
BURNS, 2018, 44 (07) :1801-1810
[3]   The Patient-Reported Impact of Scars Measure: Development and Validation [J].
Brown, Benjamin C. ;
McKenna, Stephen P. ;
Solomon, Mattea ;
Wilburn, Jeanette ;
McGrouther, Duncan A. ;
Bayat, Ardeshir .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2010, 125 (05) :1439-1449
[4]   Development of the Patient Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) 3.0: a qualitative study [J].
Carriere, M. E. ;
Mokkink, L. B. ;
Tyack, Z. ;
Westerman, M. J. ;
Pijpe, A. ;
Pleat, J. ;
van de Kar, A. L. ;
Brown, J. ;
de Vet, H. C. W. ;
van Zuijlen, P. P. M. .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2023, 32 (02) :583-592
[5]   Systematic Review on the Content of Outcome Measurement Instruments on Scar Quality [J].
Carriere, Michelle E. ;
Kwa, Kelly A. A. ;
de Haas, Louise E. M. ;
Pijpe, Anouk ;
Tyack, Zephanie ;
Ket, Johannes C. F. ;
van Zuijlen, Paul P. M. ;
de Vet, Henrica C. W. ;
Mokkink, Lidwine B. .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2019, 7 (09)
[6]  
Collins LK, 2017, FACIAL PLAST SURG, V33, P97, DOI [10.1055/s-0036-1597684, 10.1055/5-0036-1597684]
[7]   The patient and observer scar assessment scale: A reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation [J].
Draaijers, LJ ;
Tempelman, FRH ;
Botman, YAM ;
Tuinebreijer, WE ;
Middelkoop, E ;
Kreis, RW ;
van Zuijlen, PPM .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2004, 113 (07) :1960-1965
[8]   The Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire: A Reliable and Valid Patient-Reported Outcomes Measure for Linear Scars [J].
Durani, Piyush ;
McGrouther, Duncan A. ;
Ferguson, Mark W. .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2009, 123 (05) :1481-1489
[9]   Current scales for assessing human scarring: A review [J].
Durani, Piyush ;
McGrouther, D. A. ;
Ferguson, M. W. J. .
JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2009, 62 (06) :713-720
[10]   Values of patients and caregivers for donor site scars: An inter-observer analysis between patients and caregivers and prediction of cosmetic satisfaction [J].
Eskes, Anne M. ;
Brolmann, Fleur E. ;
van de Kar, Annekatrien L. ;
Niessen, Frank B. ;
Lindeboom, Robert ;
Ubbink, Dirk T. ;
Vermeulen, Hester .
BURNS, 2012, 38 (06) :796-801