ORCID Profile
0000-0002-0076-5981
Current Organisation
University of Oxford
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 06-05-2016
Abstract: The Stroke Impact Scale ( SIS ) is a stroke‐specific, quality of life measure recommended for research and clinical practice. Completion rates are suboptimal and could relate to test burden. We derived and validated a short form SIS (SF‐SIS). We examined data from the Virtual International Stroke Trial Archive, generating derivation and validation populations. We derived an SF ‐ SIS by selecting 1 item per domain of SIS , choosing items most highly correlated with total domain score. Our validation described agreement of SF ‐ SIS with original SIS and the SIS ‐16 and correlation with Barthel Index, modified Rankin Scale, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and Euro‐QoL 5 dimensions visual analog scales. We assessed discriminative validity (associations between SF ‐ SIS and factors known to influence outcome [age, physiological parameters, and comorbidity]). We assessed face validity and acceptability by sharing the SF ‐ SIS with a focus group of stroke survivors and multidisciplinary stroke healthcare staff. From 5549 acute study patients (mean age 68.5 [ SD 13] years, mean SIS 64 [ SD 32]) and 332 rehabilitation patients (mean age 65.7 [ SD 11] years, mean SIS 61 [ SD 11]), we derived an 8‐item SF ‐ SIS that demonstrated good agreement with original SIS and good correlation with our chosen functional and quality of life measures (all ρ .70, P .0001). Significant associations were seen with our chosen predictors of stroke outcome in the acute group ( P .0001). The focus group agreed with the choice of items for SF ‐ SIS across 7 of 8 domains . Using multiple, complementary methods, we have derived an SF‐ SIS and demonstrated content, convergent, and discriminant validity. This shortened SIS should allow collection of robust quality of life data with less associated test burden.
Publisher: World Scientific Pub Co Pte Ltd
Date: 23-08-2019
DOI: 10.1142/S2424835519500425
Abstract: Background: Electively-managed conditions account for over 100 000 inpatient surgeries a year in the English National Health Service alone, with further procedures in other regions of the UK, or performed on an outpatient basis. To quality assure this care and to conduct research, effective outcome measurement is critical. Traditional surgeon-centric outcome measures correlate poorly with hand function and are seldom important to patients. There has been an advent in the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hand surgery although consensus of PROM choice appears to be lacking. This systematic review aimed to describe the use of relevant PROMs in clinical research of electively-managed hand conditions. Methods: A PRISMA-compliant methodology was used. A bespoke search strategy was developed in conjunction with a search strategist, and applied to Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and PSYCHINFO from 1992 to June 2017. Pre-specified stepwise inclusion criteria were used to identify studies describing adult patients undergoing treatment for electively-managed hand conditions distal to the distal radius, with clinical outcomes measured using one or more PROMs. Results: Of 4554 results, 834 met inclusion criteria. PROMs identified included 9 disease-specific, 8 site-specific and 4 generic quality of life measures. Across all, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) was the most commonly used (overall frequency 41.0%). The most commonly reported disease-specific measure was the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (overall frequency 23.0%). The most commonly reported generic quality of life of measure was the SF-36 (overall frequency 4%). Time-analysis demonstrated predominance of site-specific PROMs since the year 2000. Conclusions: Various PROMs have been used to study electively-managed hand conditions, with site-specific PROMs most popular. However, there appears to be limited consensus on choices. A future systematic evaluation of the published psychometric properties of identified PROMs may inform standardisation of measurement.
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Michele Peters.