Guilherme Tavares de Arruda, Patricia Driusso, Amanda Garcia de Godoy, Ana Paula de Sousa, Mariana Arias Avila
{"title":"Measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures for women with dysmenorrhea: A systematic review.","authors":"Guilherme Tavares de Arruda, Patricia Driusso, Amanda Garcia de Godoy, Ana Paula de Sousa, Mariana Arias Avila","doi":"10.1111/jocn.17293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dysmenorrhea, or menstrual pain, is a subjective experience, and can only be assessed by patient-reported outcomes. These instruments should be reliable, valid and responsive.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify and critically appraise the available evidence for the measurement properties of specific patient-reported outcome measures used for dysmenorrhea.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PRISMA statement was used to report this systematic review. Databases searched were PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Web of Science, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar (April 2021; updated on February 2023). Original studies with primary data collection, with no restriction on language and publication date that reported psychometric properties of one or more dysmenorrhea-related patient-reported outcome measure. The literature searches, selection of studies, data extraction and assessment of the risk of bias were performed independently by two reviewers and followed the COSMIN guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty studies were analysed in this review, and 19 patient-reported outcome measures were evaluated. The instruments varied in relation to the measured construct and measurement properties (validity, reliability and responsiveness). The methodological quality of the studies and the quality of evidence of the patient-reported outcome measures were variable. Among the 13 studies that reported the development of patient-reported outcome measures, most had inadequate methodological quality, and the overall rating was insufficient or inconsistent.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Dysmenorrhea Symptom Interference (DSI) scale was the only identified patient-reported outcome measure that has the potential to be recommended because of its sufficient rating combined with moderate quality of evidence for content validity. Future studies should further evaluate the measurement properties of the existing patient-reported outcome measures, or develop new patient-reported outcome measures following the COSMIN methodology.</p><p><strong>Patient or public contribution: </strong>Not applicable as this is a systematic review.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO protocol: CRD42021244410. Registration on April 22, 2021.</p>","PeriodicalId":50236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17293","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Dysmenorrhea, or menstrual pain, is a subjective experience, and can only be assessed by patient-reported outcomes. These instruments should be reliable, valid and responsive.
Aim: To identify and critically appraise the available evidence for the measurement properties of specific patient-reported outcome measures used for dysmenorrhea.
Methods: The PRISMA statement was used to report this systematic review. Databases searched were PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Web of Science, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar (April 2021; updated on February 2023). Original studies with primary data collection, with no restriction on language and publication date that reported psychometric properties of one or more dysmenorrhea-related patient-reported outcome measure. The literature searches, selection of studies, data extraction and assessment of the risk of bias were performed independently by two reviewers and followed the COSMIN guidelines.
Results: Thirty studies were analysed in this review, and 19 patient-reported outcome measures were evaluated. The instruments varied in relation to the measured construct and measurement properties (validity, reliability and responsiveness). The methodological quality of the studies and the quality of evidence of the patient-reported outcome measures were variable. Among the 13 studies that reported the development of patient-reported outcome measures, most had inadequate methodological quality, and the overall rating was insufficient or inconsistent.
Conclusions: The Dysmenorrhea Symptom Interference (DSI) scale was the only identified patient-reported outcome measure that has the potential to be recommended because of its sufficient rating combined with moderate quality of evidence for content validity. Future studies should further evaluate the measurement properties of the existing patient-reported outcome measures, or develop new patient-reported outcome measures following the COSMIN methodology.
Patient or public contribution: Not applicable as this is a systematic review.
Trial registration: PROSPERO protocol: CRD42021244410. Registration on April 22, 2021.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Nursing (JCN) is an international, peer reviewed, scientific journal that seeks to promote the development and exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to all spheres of nursing practice. The primary aim is to promote a high standard of clinically related scholarship which advances and supports the practice and discipline of nursing. The Journal also aims to promote the international exchange of ideas and experience that draws from the different cultures in which practice takes place. Further, JCN seeks to enrich insight into clinical need and the implications for nursing intervention and models of service delivery. Emphasis is placed on promoting critical debate on the art and science of nursing practice.
JCN is essential reading for anyone involved in nursing practice, whether clinicians, researchers, educators, managers, policy makers, or students. The development of clinical practice and the changing patterns of inter-professional working are also central to JCN''s scope of interest. Contributions are welcomed from other health professionals on issues that have a direct impact on nursing practice.
We publish high quality papers from across the methodological spectrum that make an important and novel contribution to the field of clinical nursing (regardless of where care is provided), and which demonstrate clinical application and international relevance.