Mohamed E Awad, Danielle Melton, Kylie G Shaw, Guy Lev, Brecca M M Gaffney, Cory L Christiansen, Jason W Stoneback
{"title":"对下肢截肢者进行骨结合骨锚肢体植入术的患者报告结果测量的全面性和效率如何?","authors":"Mohamed E Awad, Danielle Melton, Kylie G Shaw, Guy Lev, Brecca M M Gaffney, Cory L Christiansen, Jason W Stoneback","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.RVW.23.00235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>» Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential for measuring quality and functional outcomes after implantation of osseointegrated bone anchored limbs for patients with lower extremity amputation.» Using a novel assessment criterion with 8 domains, this study assessed all commonly used PROMs for their efficiency and comprehensiveness.» Comprehensiveness was scored according to the presence or absence of PROM questions related to these 8 domains (maximum score = 60): mobility (15 items), prosthesis (14 items), pain (10 items), psychosocial status (10 items), independence/self-care (4 items), quality of life/satisfaction (4 items), osseoperception (1 item), general information (1 item), and vitality (1 item).» The efficiency scores were calculated by dividing the comprehensiveness score by the total number of questions answered by the patients with higher scores being deemed more efficient.» The most comprehensive PROMs were Orthotics and Prosthetics User's Survey-Lower Extremity Functional Status (OPUS-LEFS) (score = 36), Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ) (score = 31), and Questionnaire for Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation (score = 27).» The most efficient PROMs were the OPUS-LEFS (score = 1.8) and European Quality of Life (score = 1.4).</p>","PeriodicalId":47098,"journal":{"name":"JBJS Reviews","volume":"12 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Comprehensive and Efficient Are Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Individuals with Lower Extremity Amputation Undergoing Implantation of Osseointegrated Bone Anchored Limbs?\",\"authors\":\"Mohamed E Awad, Danielle Melton, Kylie G Shaw, Guy Lev, Brecca M M Gaffney, Cory L Christiansen, Jason W Stoneback\",\"doi\":\"10.2106/JBJS.RVW.23.00235\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>» Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential for measuring quality and functional outcomes after implantation of osseointegrated bone anchored limbs for patients with lower extremity amputation.» Using a novel assessment criterion with 8 domains, this study assessed all commonly used PROMs for their efficiency and comprehensiveness.» Comprehensiveness was scored according to the presence or absence of PROM questions related to these 8 domains (maximum score = 60): mobility (15 items), prosthesis (14 items), pain (10 items), psychosocial status (10 items), independence/self-care (4 items), quality of life/satisfaction (4 items), osseoperception (1 item), general information (1 item), and vitality (1 item).» The efficiency scores were calculated by dividing the comprehensiveness score by the total number of questions answered by the patients with higher scores being deemed more efficient.» The most comprehensive PROMs were Orthotics and Prosthetics User's Survey-Lower Extremity Functional Status (OPUS-LEFS) (score = 36), Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ) (score = 31), and Questionnaire for Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation (score = 27).» The most efficient PROMs were the OPUS-LEFS (score = 1.8) and European Quality of Life (score = 1.4).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47098,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JBJS Reviews\",\"volume\":\"12 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JBJS Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.23.00235\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBJS Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.23.00235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
How Comprehensive and Efficient Are Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Individuals with Lower Extremity Amputation Undergoing Implantation of Osseointegrated Bone Anchored Limbs?
» Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential for measuring quality and functional outcomes after implantation of osseointegrated bone anchored limbs for patients with lower extremity amputation.» Using a novel assessment criterion with 8 domains, this study assessed all commonly used PROMs for their efficiency and comprehensiveness.» Comprehensiveness was scored according to the presence or absence of PROM questions related to these 8 domains (maximum score = 60): mobility (15 items), prosthesis (14 items), pain (10 items), psychosocial status (10 items), independence/self-care (4 items), quality of life/satisfaction (4 items), osseoperception (1 item), general information (1 item), and vitality (1 item).» The efficiency scores were calculated by dividing the comprehensiveness score by the total number of questions answered by the patients with higher scores being deemed more efficient.» The most comprehensive PROMs were Orthotics and Prosthetics User's Survey-Lower Extremity Functional Status (OPUS-LEFS) (score = 36), Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ) (score = 31), and Questionnaire for Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation (score = 27).» The most efficient PROMs were the OPUS-LEFS (score = 1.8) and European Quality of Life (score = 1.4).
期刊介绍:
JBJS Reviews is an innovative review journal from the publishers of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. This continuously published online journal provides comprehensive, objective, and authoritative review articles written by recognized experts in the field. Edited by Thomas A. Einhorn, MD, and a distinguished Editorial Board, each issue of JBJS Reviews, updates the orthopaedic community on important topics in a concise, time-saving manner, providing expert insights into orthopaedic research and clinical experience. Comprehensive reviews, special features, and integrated CME provide orthopaedic surgeons with valuable perspectives on surgical practice and the latest advances in the field within twelve subspecialty areas: Basic Science, Education & Training, Elbow, Ethics, Foot & Ankle, Hand & Wrist, Hip, Infection, Knee, Oncology, Pediatrics, Pain Management, Rehabilitation, Shoulder, Spine, Sports Medicine, Trauma.