Defining a Patient-Centred Core Outcome Domain Set for the Assessment of Hearing Rehabilitation With Clients and Professionals.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Allen D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9110701 | biostudies-literature | 2022
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Defining a Patient-Centred Core Outcome Domain Set for the Assessment of Hearing Rehabilitation With Clients and Professionals.
Allen David D Hickson Louise L Ferguson Melanie M
Frontiers in neuroscience 20220503
<h4>Background</h4>A variety of outcome domains are currently measured for the assessment of hearing rehabilitation. To date, there is no consensus about which outcome domains should be measured, when they should be measured, and how they should be measured. In addition, most studies seeking to develop core outcome sets and measures for hearing rehabilitation services have primarily focussed on the opinions and expertise of researchers, and, to a lesser extent, clinicians, rather than also invol ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundExisting data on physical rehabilitation interventions in critical illness are challenged by outcome heterogeneity that limits data synthesis and translation of research findings into clinical practice. This protocol describes the PRACTICE study to develop a core outcome set (COS) for trials of physical rehabilitation interventions delivered across the continuum of a patient's recovery from the intensive care unit until reintegration in the community following hospital discharge.MethodsMixed methods will be used including: systematic reviews of quantitative and qualitative literature; qualitative interviews with patients and caregivers; a modified Delphi consensus process with researcher, clinician and patient/caregiver stakeholder groups; and consensus meetings for ratification of findings, resolving uncertainty, or developing an action plan for COS implementation.DiscussionThe PRACTICE COS will inform relevant stakeholders about important outcomes regarding physical rehabilitation in critical illness, and may enhance the future design and conduct of trials in this area.Trial registrationCOMET database ( www.comet-initiative.org/ , Record ID 288, 01/03/13). PROSPERO database ( CRD42014008908 , CRD42017078549 ).
| S-EPMC5970518 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purpose - Routine outcome measurement has been shown to improve performance in several fields of healthcare. National spine surgery registries have been initiated in 5 Nordic countries. However, there is no agreement on which outcomes are essential to measure for adolescent and young adult patients with a spinal deformity. The aim of this study was to develop a core outcome set (COS) that will facilitate benchmarking within and between the 5 countries of the Nordic Spinal Deformity Society (NSDS) and other registries worldwide. Material and methods - From August 2015 to September 2016, 7 representatives (panelists) of the national spinal surgery registries from each of the NSDS countries participated in a modified Delphi study. With a systematic literature review as a basis and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework as guidance, 4 consensus rounds were held. Consensus was defined as agreement between at least 5 of the 7 representatives. Data were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. Results - Consensus was reached on the inclusion of 13 core outcome domains: "satisfaction with overall outcome of surgery", "satisfaction with cosmetic result of surgery", "pain interference", physical functioning", "health-related quality of life", "recreation and leisure", "pulmonary fatigue", "change in deformity", "self-image", "pain intensity", "physical function", "complications", and "re-operation". Panelists agreed that the SRS-22r, EQ-5D, and a pulmonary fatigue questionnaire (yet to be developed) are the most appropriate set of patient-reported measurement instruments that cover these outcome domains. Interpretation - We have identified a COS for a large subgroup of spinal deformity patients for implementation and validation in the NSDS countries. This is the first study to further develop a COS in a global perspective.
| S-EPMC5694805 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rationale: Findings from individual trials of physical rehabilitation interventions in critically ill adults have limited potential for meta-analysis and informing clinical decision-making because of the heterogeneity in selection and reporting of outcomes used for evaluation. Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine a core outcome set (COS) for use in all future trials evaluating physical rehabilitation interventions delivered across the critical illness continuum of recovery. Methods: An international, two-round, online, modified Delphi consensus process, following recommended standards, was conducted. Participants (N = 329) comprised three stakeholder groups-researchers, n = 58 (18%); clinicians, n = 247 (75%); and patients and caregivers, n = 24 (7%)-and represented 26 countries and nine healthcare professions. Participants rated the importance of a range of relevant outcomes. Outcomes included in the COS were those prioritized of "critical importance" by all three stakeholder groups. Results: Survey response rates were 88% (Round 1) and 91% (Round 2). From a total of 32 initial outcomes, the following outcomes reached consensus for inclusion in the COS: physical function, activities of daily living, survival, health-related quality of life, exercise capacity, cognitive function, emotional and mental well-being, and frailty. Conclusions: This study developed a consensus-generated COS for future clinical research evaluating physical rehabilitation interventions in critically ill adults across the continuum of recovery. Ascertaining recommended measurement instruments for these core outcomes is now required to facilitate implementation of the COS.
| S-EPMC11622824 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: Outcome measures are key to tailor rehabilitation goals to the stroke patient's individual needs and to monitor poststroke recovery. The large number of available outcome measures leads to high variability in clinical use. Currently, an internationally agreed core set of motor outcome measures for clinical application is lacking. Therefore, the goal was to develop such a set to serve as a quality standard in clinical motor rehabilitation poststroke. Methods: Outcome measures for the upper and lower extremities, and activities of daily living (ADL)/stroke-specific outcomes were identified and presented to stroke rehabilitation experts in an electronic Delphi study. In round 1, clinical feasibility and relevance of the outcome measures were rated on a 7-point Likert scale. In round 2, those rated at least as "relevant" and "feasible" were ranked within the body functions, activities, and participation domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). Furthermore, measurement time points poststroke were indicated. In round 3, answers were reviewed in reference to overall results to reach final consensus. Results: In total, 119 outcome measures were presented to 33 experts from 18 countries. The recommended core set includes the Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment and Action Research Arm Test for the upper extremity section; the Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment, 10-m Walk Test, Timed-Up-and-Go, and Berg Balance Scale for the lower extremity section; and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and Barthel Index or Functional Independence Measure for the ADL/stroke-specific section. The Stroke Impact Scale was recommended spanning all ICF domains. Recommended measurement time points are days 2 ± 1 and 7; weeks 2, 4, and 12; 6 months poststroke and every following 6th month. Discussion and Conclusion: Agreement was found upon a set of nine outcome measures for application in clinical motor rehabilitation poststroke, with seven measurement time points following the stages of poststroke recovery. This core set was specifically developed for clinical practice and distinguishes itself from initiatives for stroke rehabilitation research. The next challenge is to implement this clinical core set across the full stroke care continuum with the aim to improve the transparency, comparability, and quality of stroke rehabilitation at a regional, national, and international level.
| S-EPMC7496361 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThyroid dysfunctions (TD) are common medical conditions affecting all global populations. Improved healthcare leading to increasing survival rates and delayed diagnosis rendered significant burden of the disease in the increasing number of patients with TD with comorbid illnesses. Therefore, reducing the burden of TD and improving the quality of care are crucial. Existing poor-quality data that guide evidence-based decisions only provide a fragmented picture of clinical care. The different outcomes across studies assessing the effectiveness of treatments impede our ability to synthesise results for determining the most efficient treatments. This project aims to produce a core outcome set (COS), which embeds the multiple complex dimensions of routine clinical care for the effectiveness studies and clinical care of adult patients with TD.Methods and analysisThis mixed-method project has two phases. In phase 1, we will identify a list of patient-reported and clinical outcomes through qualitative research and systematic reviews. In phase 2, we will categorise the identified outcomes using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials taxonomy of core domains and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. We will develop questionnaires from the list of outcomes identified from each domain for the two-round online Delphi exercise, aiming to reach a consensus on the COS. The Delphi process will include patients, carers, researchers and healthcare participants. We will hold an online consensus meeting involving representatives of all key stakeholders to establish the final COS.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee for Research Involving Human Subjects, Universiti Putra Malaysia and the Research Ethics Committee, National University of Malaysia. This proposed COS in TD will improve the value of data, facilitate high-quality evidence synthesis and evidence-based decision-making. Furthermore, we will present the results to participants, in peer-reviewed academic journals and conferences.Registration detailsCore Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative database registration: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/1371.
| S-EPMC8319993 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The reported prevalence of hypermobility spectrum disorders (HSD) and hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (hEDS) is unclear due to complex presentations and lack of awareness amongst professionals, contributing to diagnostic and management uncertainties. Standardising an outcome measure to assess symptoms most important to patients should help determine the impact of interventions. This Delphi study aims to reach a consensus with stakeholders on the core outcome set for children and adults with HSD/hEDS. A three-round modified Delphi consensus study with a follow-up consensus meeting was used. Stakeholder groups consisted of (1) individuals with HSD/hEDS; (2) family/friends/carers and (3) healthcare professionals. Participants could belong to more than one stakeholder group. They rated 74 symptoms using a 9-point Likert scale: 1 "not important to 9 "critically important". Symptoms achieving a consensus rating of ≥ 70.0% critical importance across all groups were included. In Round 1, 766 responses were received from 600 participants, reducing to 566 responses from 438 participants by Round 3, with 53 participating in the consensus meeting. Overall, 30 symptoms met the ≥ 70.0% critically important threshold to be included in the final core outcome set. These were categorised under the specialties of musculoskeletal and orthopaedics, social, pain, gynaecology and urology, negative affect, neurological, gastrointestinal and "other". This study is the first to identify by consensus the core outcome set to be measured for patients with HSD/hEDS. The importance of these outcomes was confirmed by individuals living with the condition, their family, friends, carers and relevant healthcare professionals. Trial registration: IRAS ID: 326,855; East Midlands - Leicester South REC (reference: 23/EM/0143); Protocol registered with the COMET Initiative. Key Points • There is a lack of standardised outcome measure for HSD/hEDS research studies due to the heterogeneity of symptom presentations. • Symptoms across musculoskeletal and orthopaedics, social, pain, gynaecology and urology, negative affect, neurological, gastrointestinal and "other" specialties were identified as the core outcome set defined as ≥ 70.0% critically important to measure for individuals with HSD/hEDS. • There were a significant number of symptoms, widely recognised in the literature to be comorbid to HSD/hEDS, that reached a critical importance threshold of 50.0-69.9%, restricting the core outcome set to only those that met 70% or above may be limiting.
| S-EPMC11582216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUse of outcome measures (OMs) in adult neurologic physical therapy is essential for monitoring changes in a patient's status over time, quantifying observations and patient-reported function, enhancing communication, and increasing the efficiency of patient care. OMs also provide a mechanism to compare patient and organizational outcomes, examine intervention effectiveness, and generate new knowledge. This clinical practice guideline (CPG) examined the literature related to OMs of balance, gait, transfers, and patient-stated goals to identify a core set of OMs for use across adults with neurologic conditions and practice settings.MethodsTo determine the scope of this CPG, surveys were conducted to assess the needs and priorities of consumers and physical therapists. OMs were identified through recommendations of the Academy of Neurologic Physical Therapy's Evidence Database to Guide Effectiveness task forces. A systematic review of the literature on the OMs was conducted and additional OMs were identified; the literature search was repeated on these measures. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were critically appraised by 2 reviewers using a modified version of the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments. (COSMIN) checklist. Methodological quality and the strength of statistical results were determined. To be recommended for the core set, the OMs needed to demonstrate excellent psychometric properties in high-quality studies across neurologic conditions.Results/discussionBased on survey results, the CPG focuses on OMs that have acceptable clinical utility and can be used to assess change over time in a patient's balance, gait, transfers, and patient-stated goals. Strong, level I evidence supports the use of the Berg Balance Scale to assess changes in static and dynamic sitting and standing balance and the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale to assess changes in balance confidence. Strong to moderate evidence supports the use of the Functional Gait Assessment to assess changes in dynamic balance while walking, the 10 meter Walk Test to assess changes in gait speed, and the 6-Minute Walk Test to assess changes in walking distance. Best practice evidence supports the use of the 5 Times Sit-to-Stand to assess sit to standing transfers. Evidence was insufficient to support use of a specific OM to assess patient-stated goals across adult neurologic conditions. Physical therapists should discuss the OM results with patients and collaboratively decide how the results should inform the plan of care.DisclaimerThe recommendations included in this CPG are intended as a guide for clinicians, patients, educators, and researchers to improve rehabilitation care and its impact on adults with neurologic conditions. The contents of this CPG were developed with support from the APTA and the Academy of Neurologic Physical Therapy (ANPT). The Guideline Development Group (GDG) used a rigorous review process and was able to freely express its findings and recommendations without influence from the APTA or the ANPT. The authors declare no competing interest.Video Abstract available for more insights from the authors (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, available at: http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A214.
| S-EPMC6023606 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5833049 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is no agreement which outcomes should be measured when investigating interventions for periodontal diseases. It is difficult to compare or combine studies with different outcomes; resulting in research wastage and uncertainty for patients and healthcare professionals.ObjectiveDevelop a core outcome set (COS) relevant to key stakeholders for use in effectiveness trials investigating prevention and management of periodontal diseases.MethodsMixed method study involving literature review; online Delphi Study; and face-to-face consensus meeting.ParticipantsKey stakeholders: patients, dentists, hygienist/therapists, periodontists, researchers.ResultsThe literature review identified 37 unique outcomes. Delphi round 1: 20 patients and 51 dental professional and researchers prioritised 25 and suggested an additional 11 outcomes. Delphi round 2: from the resulting 36 outcomes, 13 patients and 39 dental professionals and researchers prioritised 22 outcomes. A face-to-face consensus meeting was hosted in Dundee, Scotland by an independent chair. Eight patients and six dental professional and researchers participated. The final COS contains: Probing depths, Quality of life, Quantified levels of gingivitis, Quantified levels of plaque, Tooth loss.ConclusionsImplementation of this COS will ensure the results of future effectiveness trials for periodontal diseases are more relevant to patients and dental professionals, reducing research wastage. This could reduce uncertainty for patients and dental professionals by ensuring the evidence used to inform their choices is meaningful to them. It could also strengthen the quality and certainty of the evidence about the relative effectiveness of interventions.RegistrationCOMET Database: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/265?result=true.
| S-EPMC8297801 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHeterogeneity of outcomes is a problem for assessing intervention effectiveness when considering treatments for uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease. The value to all stakeholders of outcomes that have been measured and reported to date is also unclear. The aim of this study was to develop a core outcome set for symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease.MethodsAn in person-meeting was held with patients to prioritize potentially important outcomes from a previously developed longlist of outcomes. This was followed by an online three-round Delphi survey that was conducted with healthcare professionals. The results of each consensus process were compared and combined to produce the final core outcome set.ResultsA total of 82 participants enrolled in round 1 of the Delphi survey, with a final sample of 40 participants contributing to round 3. Five patients contributed to the in-person group meeting. Following the consensus processes, 11 outcomes were considered to be core by patients and healthcare professionals, and included in the core outcome set. These were: quality of life; overall health state; overall satisfaction; overall pain; common bile duct injury; biliary leak; haemorrhage; need for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; intra-abdominal collections; admission/readmission for problems; and reoperation.ConclusionA core outcome set for symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease has been developed with patients and healthcare professionals. Eleven outcomes across four key domains have been identified. These represent the minimum set of outcomes that should be reported in trials evaluating interventions for gallstone disease.
| S-EPMC10364745 | biostudies-literature