Properties of Measurements of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Physical Activity Assessment in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review.

IF 1.8 Q3 REHABILITATION

Physiotherapy Research International Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1002/pri.70076

Thamiê Cristina Stella, Inaê Silva Santos, Graziella Alves da Silva, Cid André Gomes, Luciana Maria Malosá Sampaio

{"title":"Properties of Measurements of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Physical Activity Assessment in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Thamiê Cristina Stella, Inaê Silva Santos, Graziella Alves da Silva, Cid André Gomes, Luciana Maria Malosá Sampaio","doi":"10.1002/pri.70076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and purpose: The assessment of physical activity (PA) using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) is routine due to its easy applicability and low cost. In the context of CKD, there are several studies that evaluate PA through PROM, but there is heterogeneity in the choice of tool. Therefore, the objective of this study was to identify, evaluate and synthesize the psychometric properties of PROMs used in the assessment of PA in CKD.Methods: A systematic review was carried out according to the PRISMA guidelines in PubMed, SciELO, Medline, Lilacs and EMBASE databases. The assessment of the quality of the studies was evaluated using the COSMIN Checklist and EMPRO tool.Results: 15,137 studies were found, with 17 included. Eleven PROMs were found, of which 2 were elaborate to the CKD population: Chronic Kidney Disease Physical Activity Questionnaire (CKD-PAQ) and Low Physical Activity Questionnaire (LoPAQ). Criterion validity was the most evaluated psychometric property. Only CKD-PAQ shows satisfactory results in both evaluation tools for the psychometric properties evaluated.Discussion: This systematic review found no consensus in the literature for the best PROM for assessing PA in CKD. However, the CKD-PAQ appears to be promising as the only PROM with a favorable evaluation by both COSMIN RoB and EMPRO. There is a lack of studies evaluating PA in the early stages of CKD and its responsiveness, indicating a gap in the research. COSMIN RoB and EMPRO differed from each other, showing that the choice of the evaluation tool must be guided by the evaluator's expertise and objective.Trial registration: Systematic review registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022312143).","PeriodicalId":47243,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Research International","volume":"30 3","pages":"e70076"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12151139/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Research International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.70076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose: The assessment of physical activity (PA) using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) is routine due to its easy applicability and low cost. In the context of CKD, there are several studies that evaluate PA through PROM, but there is heterogeneity in the choice of tool. Therefore, the objective of this study was to identify, evaluate and synthesize the psychometric properties of PROMs used in the assessment of PA in CKD.

Methods: A systematic review was carried out according to the PRISMA guidelines in PubMed, SciELO, Medline, Lilacs and EMBASE databases. The assessment of the quality of the studies was evaluated using the COSMIN Checklist and EMPRO tool.

Results: 15,137 studies were found, with 17 included. Eleven PROMs were found, of which 2 were elaborate to the CKD population: Chronic Kidney Disease Physical Activity Questionnaire (CKD-PAQ) and Low Physical Activity Questionnaire (LoPAQ). Criterion validity was the most evaluated psychometric property. Only CKD-PAQ shows satisfactory results in both evaluation tools for the psychometric properties evaluated.

Discussion: This systematic review found no consensus in the literature for the best PROM for assessing PA in CKD. However, the CKD-PAQ appears to be promising as the only PROM with a favorable evaluation by both COSMIN RoB and EMPRO. There is a lack of studies evaluating PA in the early stages of CKD and its responsiveness, indicating a gap in the research. COSMIN RoB and EMPRO differed from each other, showing that the choice of the evaluation tool must be guided by the evaluator's expertise and objective.

Trial registration: Systematic review registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022312143).

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

慢性肾脏疾病患者报告结果测量指标的测量特性：系统综述

背景与目的：使用患者报告结果测量法（PROMs）评估身体活动（PA）因其简单易行且成本低而成为常规方法。在CKD的背景下，有几项研究通过PROM评估PA，但在工具的选择上存在异质性。因此，本研究的目的是识别、评价和综合用于CKD患者PA评估的PROMs的心理测量特性。方法：根据PRISMA指南对PubMed、SciELO、Medline、Lilacs和EMBASE数据库进行系统评价。使用COSMIN检查表和EMPRO工具对研究质量进行评估。结果：15137项研究被发现，其中17项被纳入。共发现11份问卷，其中2份是针对CKD人群的：慢性肾脏疾病体力活动问卷（CKD- paq）和低体力活动问卷（LoPAQ）。效度是评价最多的心理测量指标。只有CKD-PAQ在两种评估工具中都显示出令人满意的结果。讨论：本系统综述发现，对于评估CKD中PA的最佳PROM，文献中没有达成共识。然而，CKD-PAQ似乎是唯一一个在COSMIN RoB和EMPRO中都有良好评价的PROM。缺乏对慢性肾病早期PA及其反应性的评估研究，表明研究存在空白。COSMIN RoB和EMPRO之间的差异表明，评估工具的选择必须以评估者的专业知识和目标为指导。试验注册：系统评价在PROSPERO注册（CRD42022312143）。

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

Physiotherapy Research International REHABILITATION-

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

5.90%

发文量

期刊介绍： Physiotherapy Research International is an international peer reviewed journal dedicated to the exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to specialist areas of physiotherapy theory, practice, and research. Our aim is to promote a high level of scholarship and build on the current evidence base to inform the advancement of the physiotherapy profession. We publish original research on a wide range of topics e.g. Primary research testing new physiotherapy treatments; methodological research; measurement and outcome research and qualitative research of interest to researchers, clinicians and educators. Further, we aim to publish high quality papers that represent the range of cultures and settings where physiotherapy services are delivered. We attract a wide readership from physiotherapists and others working in diverse clinical and academic settings. We aim to promote an international debate amongst the profession about current best evidence based practice. Papers are directed primarily towards the physiotherapy profession, but can be relevant to a wide range of professional groups. The growth of interdisciplinary research is also key to our aims and scope, and we encourage relevant submissions from other professional groups. The journal actively encourages submissions which utilise a breadth of different methodologies and research designs to facilitate addressing key questions related to the physiotherapy practice. PRI seeks to encourage good quality topical debates on a range of relevant issues and promote critical reflection on decision making and implementation of physiotherapy interventions.