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
[21]   The utility of the implementation science framework "Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services" (i-PARIHS) and the facilitator role for introducing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a medical oncology outpatient department [J].
Roberts, Natasha A. ;
Janda, Monika ;
Stover, Angela M. ;
Alexander, Kimberly E. ;
Wyld, David ;
Mudge, Alison .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2021, 30 (11) :3063-3071
[22]   Towards a clinical and empirical definition of burn scarring: A template analysis using qualitative data [J].
Simons, M. ;
Lim, P. C. C. ;
Kimble, R. M. ;
Tyack, Z. .
BURNS, 2018, 44 (07) :1811-1819
[23]   COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study [J].
Terwee, C. B. ;
Prinsen, C. A. C. ;
Chiarotto, A. ;
Westerman, M. J. ;
Patrick, D. L. ;
Alonso, J. ;
Bouter, L. M. ;
de Vet, H. C. W. ;
Mokkink, L. B. .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2018, 27 (05) :1159-1170
[24]   Psychometric properties of the Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile in adults with burn scars [J].
Tyack, Zephanie ;
Kimble, Roy ;
McPhail, Steven ;
Plaza, Anita ;
Simons, Megan .
PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (09)
[25]   Measuring the impact of burn scarring on health-related quality of life: Development and preliminary content validation of the Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile (BBSIP) for children and adults [J].
Tyack, Zephanie ;
Ziviani, Jenny ;
Kimble, Roy ;
Plaza, Anita ;
Jones, Amber ;
Cuttle, Leila ;
Simons, Megan .
BURNS, 2015, 41 (07) :1405-1419
[26]   A systematic review of the quality of burn scar rating scales for clinical and research use [J].
Tyack, Zephanie ;
Simons, Megan ;
Spinks, Anneliese ;
Wasiak, Jason .
BURNS, 2012, 38 (01) :6-18
[27]   Reliable and feasible evaluation of linear scars by the patient and observer scar assessment scale [J].
van de Kar, AL ;
Corion, LUM ;
Smeulders, MJC ;
Draaijers, LJ ;
van der Horst, CMAM ;
van Zuijlen, PPM .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2005, 116 (02) :514-522
[28]   A Clinimetric Overview of Scar Assessment Scales [J].
van der Wal, M. B. A. ;
Verhaegen, P. D. H. M. ;
Middelkoop, E. ;
van Zuijlen, P. P. M. .
JOURNAL OF BURN CARE & RESEARCH, 2012, 33 (02) :E79-E87
[29]   Clinimetric properties and clinical utility in rehabilitation of postsurgical scar rating scales: a systematic review [J].
Vercelli, Stefano ;
Ferriero, Giorgio ;
Sartorio, Francesco ;
Cisari, Carlo ;
Bravini, Elisabetta .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION RESEARCH, 2015, 38 (04) :279-286
[30]   Psychometric Findings for the SCAR-Q Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Based on 731 Children and Adults with Surgical, Traumatic, and Burn Scars from Four Countries [J].
Ziolkowski, Natalia I. ;
Pusic, Andrea L. ;
Fish, Joel S. ;
Mundy, Lily R. ;
Wong She, Richard ;
Forrest, Christopher R. ;
Hollenbeck, Scott ;
Arriagada, Cristian ;
Calcagno, Manual ;
Greenhalgh, David ;
Klassen, Anne F. .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2020, 146 (03) :330E-338E