Development of a conceptual framework of recovery after abdominal surgery

被引:15
作者
Alam, Roshni [1 ,2 ]
Montanez, Joel [3 ]
Law, Susan [2 ,4 ,5 ]
Lee, Lawrence [1 ]
Pecorelli, Nicolo [6 ,7 ]
Watanabe, Yusuke [8 ]
Chiavegato, Luciana D. [9 ]
Falconi, Massimo [6 ,7 ]
Hirano, Satoshi [8 ]
Mayo, Nancy E. [10 ,11 ,12 ]
Feldman, Liane S. [1 ,2 ,12 ]
Fiore, Julio Flavio, Jr. [1 ,2 ,12 ]
机构
[1] McGill Univ, Hlth Ctr, Steinberg Bernstein Ctr Minimally Invas Surg & In, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[2] McGill Univ, Montreal Gen Hosp, Hlth Ctr, Dept Surg, 1650 Cedar Ave,L8-121, Montreal, PQ H3G 1A4, Canada
[3] St Marys Hosp, St Marys Res Ctr, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[4] Trillium Hlth Partners, Inst Better Hlth, Mississauga, ON, Canada
[5] Univ Toronto, Inst Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Toronto, ON, Canada
[6] Ist Sci San Raffaele, Div Pancreat Surg Pancreas Translat, Milan, Italy
[7] Ist Sci San Raffaele, Clin Res Ctr, Milan, Italy
[8] Hokkaido Univ, Grad Sch Med, Dept Gastroenterol Surg 2, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan
[9] Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Pulm Div, Dept Med, Sao Paulo, Brazil
[10] McGill Univ, Sch Phys & Occupat Therapy, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[11] McGill Univ, Div Clin Epidemiol, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[12] McGill Univ, Res Inst, Hlth Ctr, Ctr Outcomes Res & Evaluat CORE, Montreal, PQ, Canada
来源
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES | 2020年 / 34卷 / 06期
关键词
Patient-reported outcome; Questionnaires; Self-report; Abdominal surgery; Postoperative period; Recovery of function; OUTCOMES PRO INSTRUMENTS; POSTOPERATIVE RECOVERY; ENHANCED RECOVERY; PATIENT;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-019-07044-x
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background There is a lack of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) with robust measurement properties to assess postoperative recovery and support patient-centered care after abdominal surgery. The aim of this study was to establish a conceptual framework of recovery after abdominal surgery to support the development of a conceptually relevant and psychometrically sound PROM. Methods Patients from four different countries (Canada, Italy, Brazil, and Japan) participated in qualitative interviews focusing on their lived experiences of recovery after abdominal surgery. Interviews were guided by a previously developed hypothesized conceptual framework established based on a literature review and expert consensus. Interviews were analyzed according to a modified grounded theory approach and transcripts were coded according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Codes for which thematic saturation was reached were classified into domains of health that are relevant to the process of recovery after abdominal surgery. These domains were organized into a structured diagram. Results 30 Patients with diverse demographics and surgical characteristics were interviewed (50% female, age 57 +/- 18 years, 66% major or major extended surgery). 39 Unique domains of recovery emerged from the interviews, 17 falling under the ICF category of "Body Functions" and 22 under "Activities and Participation". These domains constitute the conceptual framework of recovery after abdominal surgery. Conclusions This study provides comprehensive insight into patients' perspectives of the recovery process after abdominal surgery. This conceptual framework will support content validity and provide the pivotal basis for the development of a novel PROM to inform quality improvement initiatives and patient-centered research in abdominal surgery. Graphic abstract
引用
收藏
页码:2665 / 2674
页数:10
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [1] Development of a patient-reported outcome measure of recovery after abdominal surgery: a hypothesized conceptual framework
    Alam, Roshni
    Figueiredo, Sabrina M.
    Balvardi, Saba
    Nauche, Benedicte
    Landry, Tara
    Lee, Lawrence
    Mayo, Nancy E.
    Feldman, Liane S.
    Fiore, Julio F., Jr.
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2018, 32 (12): : 4874 - 4885
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2001, ICF: International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2013, RES HDB HEALTHTALKON
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2009, Guidance for industry: Patient-Reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims
  • [5] Outcomes reported in high-impact surgical journals
    Antonescu, I.
    Mueller, C. L.
    Fried, G. M.
    Vassiliou, M. C.
    Mayo, N. E.
    Feldman, L. S.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2014, 101 (05) : 582 - 589
  • [6] Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience
    Brod, Meryl
    Tesler, Laura E.
    Christensen, Torsten L.
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2009, 18 (09) : 1263 - 1278
  • [7] Measuring the outcome of surgical procedures: what are the challenges?
    Carli, F
    Mayo, N
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2001, 87 (04) : 531 - 533
  • [8] Icf linking rules:: An update based on lessons learned
    Cieza, A
    Geyh, S
    Chatterji, S
    Kostanjsek, N
    Üstün, B
    Stucki, G
    [J]. JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION MEDICINE, 2005, 37 (04) : 212 - 218
  • [9] Essay - Medical robotics - a bright future
    Davies, Brian
    [J]. LANCET, 2006, 368 : S53 - S54
  • [10] Feldman LS, 2015, CAN J ANESTH, V62, P120, DOI 10.1007/s12630-014-0263-1