RESUMEN
PURPOSE: We conducted a systematic review of studies reporting on measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), with a special focus on the use of the preference-weighted instruments, in patients with extremity bone sarcoma treated with limb-salvage surgery or amputation. METHODS: We searched MedLine, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science for English-language studies reporting on HRQoL of patients with bone sarcoma from inception to 28 August 2023. All records found were independently reviewed by two reviewers. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the CONSORT 2010 checklist to assess the quality of the cohort and randomised studies, respectively. RESULTS: The search identified 1225 records, of which 16 studies were included for data extraction. Only one study used a preference-weighted instrument for measuring HRQoL in a small sample of patients (n = 28). Ten studies used the generic SF-36 questionnaire, but no preference-weighted HRQoL based on SF-6D was derived from the SF-36 scores. Most studies comparing HRQoL between amputation and limb-salvage surgery reported no significant differences. Twelve cohort studies scored six or more out of nine points based on the NOS. The only randomised study scored 54% on the CONSORT 2010 checklist. CONCLUSIONS: The approaches used to measure HRQoL were inconsistent and outcome scores varied substantially. Only one study used preference-weighted instruments for HRQoL measurement. Future research into the surgical treatment of extremity bone sarcoma should consider the use of preference-weighted instruments to measure HRQoL, which will therefore enable economic evaluation for the growing orthopaedic armamentarium of novel surgical interventions. REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered with the PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42021282380).
RESUMEN
Objective This study determined the economic impact of 16 'high-priority' hospital-acquired complications (HACs), as defined by the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care, from the perspective of an individual Australian health service. Methods A retrospective cohort study was performed using a deidentified patient dataset containing 93056 in-patient separations in Northern Health (Victoria, Australia) from 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017. Two log-linked generalised linear regression models were used to obtain additional costs and additional length of stay (LOS) for 16 different HACs, with the main outcome measures being the additional cost and LOS for all 16 HACs. Results In all, 1700 separations involving HACs (1.83%) were identified. The most common HAC was health care-associated infections. Most HACs were associated with a statistically significant risk of increased cost (15/16 HACs) and LOS (11/16 HACs). HACs involving falls resulting in fracture or other intracranial injury were associated with the highest additional cost (A$17173). The biggest increase in additional LOS was unplanned admissions to the intensive care unit (5.42 days). Conclusions This study shows the economic impact of HACs from the perspective of an individual health service. The methodology used demonstrates how other health services could determine safety priorities corresponding to their own casemix. What is known about the topic? HACs are a major issue in Australian health care; however, their effect on cost and LOS at the individual health service level is not well quantified. What does this paper add? Additional cost and LOS implications for 16 high-priority HACs have been quantified within an Australian health service. There is substantial variation in terms of the number of HACs and the economic impact of each HAC. What are the implications for practitioners? This study provides a template for other health services to assess the economic impact of HACs corresponding to their own casemix and to inform targeted patient safety programs.
