Evaluating measures of quality of life in adult scoliosis: a protocol for a systematic review and narrative synthesis

被引:3
作者
Archer, James E. [1 ]
Baird, Charles [1 ]
Gardner, Adrian [1 ,2 ]
Rushton, Alison B. [3 ]
Heneghan, Nicola R. [2 ]
机构
[1] Royal Orthopaed Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, Bristol Rd South, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[2] Univ Birmingham, Coll Life & Environm Sci, Sch Sport Exercise & Rehabil Sci, Ctr Precis Rehabil Spinal Pain CPR Spine, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[3] Western Univ, Sch Phys Therapy, Fac Hlth Sci, London, ON, Canada
关键词
Adult scoliosis; Health-related quality of life; Systematic review; LOW-BACK-PAIN; SPINAL DEFORMITY; RESEARCH SOCIETY; LUMBAR SCOLIOSIS; OUTCOMES; TERMINOLOGY; TAXONOMY; COSMIN;
D O I
10.1186/s13643-021-01811-5
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Adult scoliosis represents a distinct subgroup of scoliosis patients for whom the diagnosis can have a large impact on their health-related quality of life (HR-QOL). Therefore, HR-QOL patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential to assess disease progression and the impact of interventions. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the measurement properties of HR-QOL PROMs in adult scoliosis patients. Methods: We will conduct a literature search, from their inception onwards, of multiple electronic databases including AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, PsychINFO and PubMed. The searches will be performed in two stages. For both stages of the search, participants will be aged 18 and over with a diagnosis of scoliosis. The primary outcome of interest in the stage one searches will be studies which use PROMs to investigate HR-QOL as defined by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy, the secondary outcome will be to assess the frequency of use of the various PROMs. In stage two, the primary outcome of interest will be studies which assess the measurement properties of the HR-QOL PROMs identified in stage one. No specific measurement property will be given priority. No planned secondary outcomes have been identified but will be reported if discovered. In stage one, the only restriction on study design will be the exclusion of systematic reviews. In Stage two the only restriction on study design will be the exclusion of full-text articles not available in the English language. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion. The study methodological quality (or risk of bias) will be appraised using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. The overall strength of the body of evidence will then be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. A narrative synthesis will be provided with information presented in the main text and tables to summarise and explain the characteristics and findings of the included studies. The narrative synthesis will explore the evidence for currently used PROMs in adult scoliosis patients and any areas that require further study. Discussion: The review will help clinicians and researchers identify a HR-QOL PROM for use in patients with adult scoliosis. Findings from the review will be published and disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Quality appraisal of workers' wellbeing measures: a systematic review protocol
    Jarden, Rebecca J.
    Sandham, Margaret
    Siegert, Richard J.
    Koziol-McLain, Jane
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2018, 7
  • [12] Quality appraisal of workers’ wellbeing measures: a systematic review protocol
    Rebecca J. Jarden
    Margaret Sandham
    Richard J. Siegert
    Jane Koziol-McLain
    Systematic Reviews, 7
  • [13] Measurement properties of adult quality-of-life measurement instruments for eczema: Protocol for a systematic review
    Apfelbacher C.J.
    Heinl D.
    Prinsen C.A.C.
    Deckert S.
    Chalmers J.
    Ofenloch R.
    Humphreys R.
    Sach T.
    Chamlin S.
    Schmitt J.
    Systematic Reviews, 4 (1)
  • [14] Impact of virtual consultations on quality of care in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and narrative synthesis protocol
    Aldakhil, Reham
    Lammila-Escalera, Elena
    Hayhoe, Benedict
    Majeed, Azeem
    Greenfield, Geva
    Neves, Ana Luisa
    BMJ OPEN, 2024, 14 (11):
  • [15] Measures of health-related quality of life in PCOS women: a systematic review
    Moghadam, Zahra Behboodi
    Fereidooni, Bita
    Saffari, Mohsen
    Montazeri, Ali
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF WOMENS HEALTH, 2018, 10 : 397 - 408
  • [16] Preference-based measures of health-related quality of life in Indigenous people: a systematic review
    Roy, Lilla M.
    Neill, Aidan
    Swampy, Kristen
    Auger, Juliette
    Campbell, Sandra M.
    Chatwood, Susan
    Al Sayah, Fatima
    Johnson, Jeffrey A.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2024, 33 (02) : 317 - 333
  • [17] A COSMIN systematic review of instruments for evaluating health-related quality of life in people with Hereditary Angioedema
    Baroni, Irene
    Paglione, Giulia
    De Angeli, Giada
    Angolani, Miriam
    Callus, Edward
    Magon, Arianna
    Conte, Gianluca
    Terzoni, Stefano
    Lusignani, Maura
    Caruso, Rosario
    Zanichelli, Andrea
    HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2025, 23 (01)
  • [18] Measures of Quality of Life in People with Aphasia. A systematic review
    Garrido, Dunia
    Lydia Nino, Ana
    Carballo, Gloria
    REVISTA DE INVESTIGACION EN LOGOPEDIA, 2022, 12 (02):
  • [19] Quality of life measures in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A systematic review
    Radin, M.
    El Hasbani, G.
    Barinotti, A.
    Roccatello, D.
    Uthman, I
    Taher, A.
    Sciascia, S.
    REUMATISMO, 2021, 73 (04) : 208 - 228
  • [20] Measures of quality of life in children with cochlear implant: systematic review
    Morettin, Marina
    Dias dos Santos, Maria Jaquelini
    Stefanin, Marcela Rosolen
    Antonio, Fernanda de Lourdes
    Bevilacqua, Maria Cecilia
    Alves Cardoso, Maria Regina
    BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, 2013, 79 (03) : 382 - 390