A systematic review of outcome measurement instruments used in pouch anal and vaginal fistulae: a COSMIN-based analysis.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Quality of Life Research Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1007/s11136-025-03911-4
Easan Anand, Shivani Joshi, Lillian Reza, Kapil Sahnan, Phillip Lung, Ailsa Hart, Phil Tozer
{"title":"A systematic review of outcome measurement instruments used in pouch anal and vaginal fistulae: a COSMIN-based analysis.","authors":"Easan Anand, Shivani Joshi, Lillian Reza, Kapil Sahnan, Phillip Lung, Ailsa Hart, Phil Tozer","doi":"10.1007/s11136-025-03911-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Pouch-related fistulae are devastating complications of ileoanal pouch surgery, which is performed to improve the quality of life (QoL) for patients who have had a proctocolectomy. Their management is limited by inconsistent evidence, including using poorly and heterogeneously defined outcomes. This study aims to identify all Outcome Measurement Instruments (OMIs) used in pouch fistula research, including Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and Clinician-Reported Outcome Measures (ClinROMs) and evaluate their quality using COSMIN guidelines to help select the best tool for a standardised core outcome measurement set in a future consensus study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted to identify all OMIs used in ileo-anal pouch fistulae studies, from MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. We evaluated existing OMIs based on COSMIN guidelines and used the GRADE approach to assess evidence quality. Results were synthesized narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 91 studies, 13 OMIs were reviewed. Pouch-specific instruments performed poorly in key domains of reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Only 17.6% of studies assessed QoL using PROMs. The best-performing instruments were the SF-36 and IBDQ. The Ileoanal Pouch Syndrome Severity Score was the only pouch-specific instrument that involved patients in its development and although useful for pouch dysfunction, it lacks specific QoL assessment and was not validated in pouch-fistulae patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Existing OMIs for pouch-related fistulae lack adequate measurement properties, with no PROMs specifically validated for QoL in this population and very few instruments involving patients in their development. There is an unmet need for a validated PROM specifically for QoL in pouch-related fistulae.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":" ","pages":"1521-1539"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12119747/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-025-03911-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Pouch-related fistulae are devastating complications of ileoanal pouch surgery, which is performed to improve the quality of life (QoL) for patients who have had a proctocolectomy. Their management is limited by inconsistent evidence, including using poorly and heterogeneously defined outcomes. This study aims to identify all Outcome Measurement Instruments (OMIs) used in pouch fistula research, including Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and Clinician-Reported Outcome Measures (ClinROMs) and evaluate their quality using COSMIN guidelines to help select the best tool for a standardised core outcome measurement set in a future consensus study.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify all OMIs used in ileo-anal pouch fistulae studies, from MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. We evaluated existing OMIs based on COSMIN guidelines and used the GRADE approach to assess evidence quality. Results were synthesized narratively.

Results: Among 91 studies, 13 OMIs were reviewed. Pouch-specific instruments performed poorly in key domains of reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Only 17.6% of studies assessed QoL using PROMs. The best-performing instruments were the SF-36 and IBDQ. The Ileoanal Pouch Syndrome Severity Score was the only pouch-specific instrument that involved patients in its development and although useful for pouch dysfunction, it lacks specific QoL assessment and was not validated in pouch-fistulae patients.

Conclusion: Existing OMIs for pouch-related fistulae lack adequate measurement properties, with no PROMs specifically validated for QoL in this population and very few instruments involving patients in their development. There is an unmet need for a validated PROM specifically for QoL in pouch-related fistulae.

用于袋式肛门瘘和阴道瘘的结果测量仪器的系统回顾:基于cosmin的分析。
目的:回肠袋相关瘘管是回肠袋手术的严重并发症,其目的是提高结肠直肠切除术患者的生活质量。他们的管理受到不一致的证据的限制,包括使用不良和不同定义的结果。本研究旨在确定用于袋瘘研究的所有结果测量工具(OMIs),包括患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)和临床报告的结果测量(clinrom),并使用COSMIN指南评估其质量,以帮助在未来的共识研究中选择标准化核心结果测量集的最佳工具。方法:从MEDLINE、Embase和Cochrane图书馆对所有用于回肠肛管瘘管研究的OMIs进行了系统评价。我们根据COSMIN指南评估了现有的OMIs,并使用GRADE方法评估证据质量。对结果进行叙述性综合。结果:在91项研究中,回顾了13项OMIs。袋专用仪器在可靠性、有效性和响应性的关键领域表现不佳。只有17.6%的研究使用prom评估QoL。表现最好的乐器是SF-36和IBDQ。回肠袋综合征严重程度评分是唯一涉及患者发展的袋特异性工具,尽管对袋功能障碍有用,但缺乏特异性的生活质量评估,并且未在袋瘘患者中得到验证。结论:现有的用于袋相关瘘管的OMIs缺乏足够的测量特性,没有专门验证该人群生活质量的prom,并且很少有仪器涉及患者的发展。有一个未满足的需求,验证的PROM,特别是在袋相关瘘的生活质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Quality of Life Research
Quality of Life Research 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
224
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality of Life Research is an international, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the rapid communication of original research, theoretical articles and methodological reports related to the field of quality of life, in all the health sciences. The journal also offers editorials, literature, book and software reviews, correspondence and abstracts of conferences. Quality of life has become a prominent issue in biometry, philosophy, social science, clinical medicine, health services and outcomes research. The journal''s scope reflects the wide application of quality of life assessment and research in the biological and social sciences. All original work is subject to peer review for originality, scientific quality and relevance to a broad readership. This is an official journal of the International Society of Quality of Life Research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信