Psychometric validation of the FACE-Q Aesthetics Satisfaction with Temples scale in individuals seeking minimally invasive treatment to improve temple hollowing.

BACKGROUND: The FACE-Q Aesthetics is used extensively to measure patient reported outcomes for minimally invasive and surgical facial aesthetic treatments. We recently developed a new FACE-Q scale to assess satisfaction with the appearance of the temples. AIM: The aim of this study was to field test the FACE-Q Satisfaction with Temples scale to examine its psychometric properties. METHODS: The FACE-Q Satisfaction with Temples scale was administered to 171 adults (22 years or older) seeking minimally invasive treatment to improve temple hollowing as part of a clinical trial. The severity of temple hollowing was established through the clinician-reported Allergan Temple Hollowing scale (clinician-rated). The psychometric properties of the FACE-Q Satisfaction with Temples scale were established by testing Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) assumptions and model fit; unidimensionality by principal component analysis; and construct validity by hypothesis testing. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 171 adults (mean age 54.7 ± 9.9, range, 25-82 years). RMT analysis provided evidence for the scientific soundness of a 12-item Satisfaction with Temples scale. The data fit the Rasch model (χ2 = 20.47, df = 24, p = 0.67), all items had ordered thresholds, and good item fit. Scale reliability was high, with Person Separation Index and Cronbach alpha values with and without extremes ≥0.93. Principal component analysis revealed a single component with high factor coefficients. Construct validity was established as scores for the Satisfaction with Temples and Face Overall scales were correlated (r = 0.623, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The FACE-Q Satisfaction with Temples scale is a reliable and valid measure that can be used in clinical practice and research to measure outcomes following treatment for temple hollowing.

German Translation and Linguistic Validation of the LIMB­Q: A Patient-reported Outcome Measure for Lower Extremity Trauma.

Background: Lower extremity trauma can have a significant impact on a patient's quality of life. The LIMB-Q is a recently developed and validated patient-reported outcome measure that assesses patient-specific outcomes and experience of health care. The aim of this study was to translate and linguistically validate the LIMB-Q from English to German. Methods: The translation was performed by combining World Health Organization and Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research guidelines. The process consisted of forward translations, a backward translation, expert panel meetings, cognitive debriefing interviews with patients, and several rounds of discussion and reconciliation with the creators of LIMB-Q. The goal was to obtain a culturally and conceptually accurate translation of LIMB-Q into German for use in Switzerland. Results: From the two forward translations, there was one primary discrepancy between the two translators that was discussed to determine the most conceptually accurate translation. From the backward translations, there were 63 items that required discussion and re-translation. Nine patients participated in the cognitive debriefing interviews, which led to three items being modified. The translation process led to a linguistically validated and conceptually equivalent German version of the LIMB-Q. Conclusions: The German (Switzerland) version of LIMB-Q is now available. This will offer a valuable tool for lower extremity trauma research and clinical care in German-speaking populations.

Improving the Impact of BODY-Q Scores Through Minimal Important Differences in Body Contouring Surgery: An International Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The BODY-Q is a widely used patient-reported outcome measure for comprehensive assessment of treatment outcomes specific to patients undergoing body contouring surgery (BCS). However, for BODY-Q to be meaningfully interpreted and used in clinical practice, minimal important difference (MID) scores are needed. A MID is defined as the smallest change in outcome measure score that patients perceive important. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine BODY-Q MID estimates for patients undergoing BCS to enhance the interpretability of the BODY-Q. METHODS: Data from an international, prospective cohort from Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Poland were included. Two distribution-based methods were used to estimate MID: 0.2 standard deviations of mean baseline scores and the mean standardized response change of BODY-Q scores from baseline to 3 years postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 12,554 assessments from 3,237 participants (mean age; 42.5±9.3 years; body mass index; 28.9±4.9 kg/m2) were included. Baseline MID scores ranged from 1 to 5 in the health-related quality of life (HRQL) scales and 3 to 6 in the appearance scales. The estimated MID scores from baseline to 3 years follow-up ranged from 4 to 5 in HRQL and from 4 to 8 in the appearance scales. CONCLUSIONS: The BODY-Q MID estimates from before BCS to 3 years postoperatively ranged from 4 to 8 and are recommended for use to interpret patients' BODY-Q scores, evaluate treatment effects of different BCS procedures, and for calculating sample size for future studies.

Development and validation of a patient-reported outcome measure for hair loss treatment: The HAIR-Q.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for hair loss focus mainly on Alopecia Areata. We created a PROM (i.e., HAIR-Q) that is applicable to any hair loss condition. The HAIR-Q measures satisfaction with hair. PATIENTS/METHODS: Concept elicitation interviews were conducted and analyzed to develop a draft scale. Content validity was established through multiple rounds of patient and expert input. Psychometric properties of the scale were examined in an online sample (i.e., Prolific) using Rasch measurement theory (RMT) analysis. Test-retest reliability and tests of construct validation were examined. RESULTS: Content validity of a 22-item draft scale was established with input from 11 patients, 12 experts and an online Prolific sample of 59 people who had a variety of hair loss treatments. In the RMT analysis (n = 390), 8 items were dropped. Data for the 14-item scale fit the Rasch model (χ2 = 89.85, df = 70, p = 0.06). All 14 items had ordered thresholds and good item fit. Reliability was high with person separation index and Cronbach alpha values ≥0.91, and intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.94 based on a sample of 97 participants. Higher (better) scores on the scale were associated with having more hair, looking younger than ones' age, satisfaction with hair overall, being less bothered by hair loss, and for those who had a hair loss treatment in the past year, being more satisfied with their hair now than before treatment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The HAIR-Q evidenced reliability and validity and can be used in research and to inform clinical care to measure satisfaction with hair from the patient perspective.

Establishing test-retest reliability and the smallest detectable change of FACE-Q Aesthetic Module scales.

BACKGROUND: The test-retest (TRT) reliability of FACE-Q Aesthetic scales is yet to be assessed. The aim of this study was to establish the TRT reliability of 17 FACE-Q Aesthetic scales and determine the smallest detectable change (SDC) that can be identified using these scales. METHODS: Data were collected from an online international sample platform (Prolific). Participants ≥20 years old, who had been to a dermatologist or plastic surgeon for a facial aesthetic treatment within the past 12 months were asked to provide demographic and clinical information and complete an online REDcap survey consisting of 17 FACE-Q Aesthetic scales. Participants were asked if they would be willing to complete the survey again in 7 days. Only the participants who reported no important change in the scale construct and completed the retest within 14 days were included. RESULTS: A total of 342 unique participants completed the TRT survey. The mean age of the sample was 36.6 (±11.5) years, and 82.4% were female. With outlier data removed, all FACE-Q scales demonstrated an intraclass correlation coefficient >0.70 indicating "good" TRT reliability. The standard error of measurement for the included scales ranged from 3.37 to 11.87, corresponding to a range of SDCgroup from 0.95 to 3.23 and SDCind from 9.34 to 32.91. CONCLUSION: All included FACE-Q scales demonstrated sufficient TRT reliability and stability overall after the outlier data were removed. Moreover, the authors calculated the values for the SDC for these scales.

Iterative qualitative approach to establishing content validation of a patient-reported outcome measure for arm lymphedema: the LYMPH-Q Upper Extremity Module.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BRCL) is one of the most common causes of upper extremity (UE) lymphedema in developed nations and substantially impacts health-related quality of life. To advance our understanding of the epidemiology and treatment of BRCL, rigorously developed and validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are needed. This study aimed to demonstrate the iterative content validity of a modular UE lymphedema-specific PROM called the LYMPH-Q UE module. METHODS: A multi-step iterative qualitative approach was used. Semi-structured interview data from in-depth qualitative interviews with adult women (18 years and older) with BCRL were used to develop the first set of the LYMPH-Q UE scales. The content validity of these scales was demonstrated with patient and clinician feedback. Over the course of cognitive debriefing interviews, additional concepts of lymphedema worry and impact on work were identified as missing from the LYMPH-Q UE module. Subsequently, two new qualitative studies (a focus group and in-depth concept elicitation interviews with patients) were conducted, and two new scales were developed to measure lymphedema worry and impact on work life and their content validity was demonstrated. RESULTS: Qualitative data from in-depth and cognitive interviews with 15 (age 40-74 years) and 16 (age 38-74 years) women with BRCL, respectively, and feedback from 12 clinical experts, were used to develop and demonstrate the content validity of six LYMPH-Q UE scales measuring symptoms, function, appearance, psychological, information, and arm sleeve. Additionally, data from in-depth interviews with 12 (age 35-72 years) women with UE lymphedema and four focus groups (n = 16 women; age 35-74 years) was used to develop and assess the content validity of two new LYMPH-Q UE scales measuring lymphedema worry and impact on work life. The content validity of the previously established six scales was also demonstrated in these subsequent qualitative studies. CONCLUSION: The LYMPH-Q UE is a modular PROM developed using international guidelines for PROM development and can be used in clinical practice, research, and quality improvement to enhance patient-centered shared decision-making. This study's innovative and iterative approach to content validation demonstrates that the LYMPH-Q UE is a comprehensive measure that includes important concepts relevant to patients with UE lymphedema.

The WOUND-Q Function and Symptoms Scales for Chronic Lower Extremity Wounds: A Validation Study.

Objective: Determine the validity and reliability of the LIMB-Q scales, Function, and Symptoms in patients with chronic lower extremity wounds. Approach: Cognitive debriefing interviews with people with current or previous wounds were conducted to examine content validity. Scales were field-tested in an international sample of people with chronic lower extremity wounds sourced from an online platform (i.e., Prolific). Psychometric properties were examined using the Rasch Measurement Theory analysis. A test-retest reproducibility study was performed, and construct validity was examined. Results: Content validity was established after 10 cognitive interviews. A total of 233 people with lower extremity wounds (age 19-80 years, mean 39.3) participated in the field test. All 25 items tested demonstrated good fit to the Rasch model with ordered thresholds. One item had a fit residual outside ±2.5, but no items had significant χ2 values after Bonferroni adjustment. Reliability was high with the person separation index, Cronbach alpha, and intraclass correlation coefficient values >0.8. Strong correlations were found between the Function and Symptoms scales and EQ-5D dimensions measuring similar constructs as well as the EQ-5D global score. All hypotheses for construct validity were confirmed. Innovation: Patient-reported outcome measures are an important component of patient-centered care, as they capture the patient's perspective in a rigorous and reproducible way. Adding these two scales to the WOUND-Q provides a means to measure function and symptoms associated with lower extremity wounds. Conclusion: These new WOUND-Q scales can be used to measure outcomes important to patients with lower extremity wounds in clinical settings and research studies.

Extracting big data from the internet to support the development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast implant illness: a proof of concept study.

PURPOSE: Individuals with health conditions often use online patient forums to share their experiences. These patient data are freely available and have rarely been used in patient-reported outcomes (PRO) research. Web scraping, the automated identification and coding of webpage data, can be employed to collect patient experiences for PRO research. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of using web scraping to support the development of a new PRO measure for breast implant illness (BII). METHODS: Nine publicly available BII-specific web forums were chosen post-consultation with two prominent BII advocacy leaders. The Python Selenium and Pandas packages were used to automate extraction of de-identified text from the individual posts/comments into a spreadsheet. Data were coded using a line-by-line approach and constant comparison was used to create top-level domains and sub-domains. RESULTS: 6362 unique codes were identified and organized into four top-level domains of information needs, symptom experiences, life impact of BII, and care experiences. Information needs of women included seeking/sharing information pre-breast implant surgery, post-breast implant surgery, while contemplating explant surgery, and post-explant surgery. Symptoms commonly described by women included fatigue, brain fog, and musculoskeletal symptoms. Many comments described BII's impact on daily activities and psychosocial wellbeing. Lastly, some comments described negative care experiences and experiences related to advocating for themselves to providers. CONCLUSION: This proof-of-concept study demonstrated the feasibility of employing web scraping as a cost-effective, efficient method to understand the experiences of women with BII. These data will be used to inform the development of a BII-specific PROM.

Minimal important difference in weight loss following bariatric surgery: Enhancing BODY-Q interpretability.

BODY-Q is a patient-reported outcome measure for comprehensive assessment of outcomes specific to patients undergoing bariatric surgery. The clinical utility of BODY-Q is hampered by the lack of guidance on score interpretation. This study aimed to determine minimal important difference (MID) for assessment of BODY-Q. Prospective BODY-Q data from Denmark and the Netherlands pre- and post-bariatric surgery were collected. Two distribution-based methods were used to estimate MID by 0.2 standard deviations of baseline scores and the mean standardized response change of scores from baseline to 3-years postoperatively. In total, 5476 assessments from 2253 participants were included of which 1628 (72.3%) underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, 586 (26.0%) sleeve gastrectomy, 33 (1.5%) gastric banding, and 6 (0.03%) other surgeries. The mean age was 45.1 ± 10.9 with a mean BMI of 46.6 ± 9.6. Baseline MID ranged from 1 to 4 in health-related quality of life (HRQL) and from 2 to 8 in appearance scales. The mean change of scores ranged from 4 to 5 in HRQL and from 4 to 7 in the appearance scales. The estimated MID for the change in BODY-Q HRQL and appearance scales ranged from 3 to 8 and is recommended for use to interpret BODY-Q scores and assess treatment effects in bariatric surgery.

Patient factors associated with cancer worry post-breast reconstruction: A cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: The BREAST-Q Breast Cancer module is a patient-reported outcome measure for women with breast cancer diagnosis. Our research team developed and validated a novel BREAST-Q scale for this module that measures quality of life outcomes specific to cancer worry. The aim of this study was to investigate patient related breast reconstruction factors that are associated with worse scores on the new BREAST-Q Cancer Worry Scale. METHODS: Women with a history of breast cancer treated with mastectomy and reconstruction, aged ≥18 years, and English-speaking were recruited through the Love Research Army between October and November 2019. Participants completed demographic and clinical questions alongside the BREAST-Q Cancer Worry Scale. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were used to identify participant characteristics associated with cancer worry scores. RESULTS: Among the 554 potential respondents, 538 (97.1%) completed the Cancer Worry Scale. The average patient age was 58.4 (+9.8) years. Cancer Worry scores were normally distributed with a mean of 46.4 (+17.2). Cancer Worry scores were significantly associated (p < 0.01) with younger age, history of radiation therapy, complications associated with breast surgery since diagnosis, use of textured breast implants, and shorter duration since surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory analysis provides evidence of patient characteristics that may be associated with cancer worry following postmastectomy breast reconstruction.

Further psychometric evaluation of the WOUND-Q: A responsiveness study.

The WOUND-Q is a modular patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) with 13 scales measuring constructs across 4 domains (i.e., wound characteristics, health related quality of life, experience of care and wound treatment). The psychometrics of the WOUND-Q were previously assessed and the 13 scales evidenced good validity and reliability. However, the responsiveness (i.e., ability to detect clinical change) of the WOUND-Q has yet to be assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate responsiveness for 9 WOUND-Q scales that assess outcomes, in a sample of people 18 years of age or older with chronic wounds that were present for at least 3 months. This study conducted a 4 month follow-up of 421 participants who completed the WOUND-Q as part of a previous psychometric study. Participants completed an online survey answering questions about their current wound state (e.g., number, type, size, smell, drainage), anchor questions about change, as well as the WOUND-Q scales that they had completed in their initial assessment. Pre-defined hypotheses were tested with a 75% acceptance threshold indicating sufficient evidence of responsiveness. Minimally important differences (MIDs) were also calculated using both anchor-based and distribution-based methods. Of 390 invited participants, 320 provided responses, ranging in age from 19 to 84 years. Acceptance of hypotheses ranged from 60% to 100%, with only the Symptom scale not meeting the 75% threshold. The findings of this study provide evidence that the WOUND-Q can validly measure clinical change in patients with chronic wounds.

Patient factors associated with novel EAR-Q appearance, psychosocial, and social scales: A cross-sectional study and regression analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The EAR-Q is a rigorously validated patient-reported outcome measure, which evaluates ear appearance and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with congenital or acquired ear conditions. The aim of this study was to conduct an exploratory analysis to examine the factors associated with EAR-Q appearance and HRQL scale scores. METHODS: In this study, 862 participants, aged 8-29 years, with congenital or acquired ear conditions, completed the EAR-Q as part of an international field-test study. Patients responded to demographic and clinical questions as well as the EAR-Q. Univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses were used to determine factors that were significant predictors for the scores on the EAR-Q Appearance, Psychological, and Social scales. RESULTS: Most participants were men (57.4%), awaiting treatment (55.0%), and had a microtia diagnosis (70.4%), with a mean age of 13 (±4) years. Worse ear appearance scores (p < 0.02) were associated with male gender, microtia, no history of treatment, ear surgery within 6 months, unilateral involvement, and greater self-reported ear asymmetry. Decreased psychological scores (p < 0.01) were associated with increasing participant age, no treatment history, recent ear surgery, and dissatisfaction with ears matching or overall dissatisfaction. Lower social scores (p ≤ 0.04) were associated with no treatment history, those awaiting surgery, ear surgery within the last 6 months, bilateral involvement, and self-reported ears matching or overall appearance. CONCLUSION: This analysis identified patient factors that may influence ear appearance and HRQL scale scores. These findings provide evidence of patient factors that should be adjusted for when undertaking future observational research designs using the EAR-Q in this patient population.

Extending the Range of Measurement for Minimally Invasive Treatments by Adding New Concepts to FACE-Q Aesthetics Scales.

Background: The Satisfaction with Face Overall and Psychological Function scales are the most frequently used FACE-Q Aesthetics module scales. This study aimed to extend their range of measurement by adding and testing new concepts. We aimed to create FACE-Q Aesthetics item libraries. Methods: In-depth concept elicitation interviews were conducted. Concepts were formed into items and refined through multiple rounds of patient and expert input. The items were tested with people living in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom who had minimally invasive facial aesthetic treatments. Participants were recruited through an online platform (ie, Prolific). Psychometric properties were examined using Rasch measurement theory analysis, test-retest reliability, and construct validity. Results: We conducted 26 interviews. New concepts were developed into items and refined with input from 12 experts, 11 clinic patients, and 184 Prolific participants. A sample of 1369 Prolific participants completed 52 appearance and 22 psychological items. After removing 10 and 2 items respectively, the psychometric tests provided evidence of reliability with the person separation index, Cronbach alpha, and test-retest reliability values without extremes of 0.88 or more. For validity, lower scores were associated with looking older than one's age, being more bothered by facial skin laxity, treatment wearing off, and having deeper lines on Merz Assessment scales. Short-form scales formed from the 42 appearance items provide examples of item library application. Conclusions: This study provides an innovative means to customize scales to measure appearance and psychological function that maximizes content validity and minimizes respondent burden in the context of minimally invasive treatments.

The SKIN-Q: An Innovative Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Evaluating Minimally Invasive Skin Treatments for the Face and Body.

Background: As the aesthetics field continues to innovate, it is important that outcomes are carefully evaluated. Objectives: To develop item libraries to measure how skin looks and feels from the patient perspective, that is, SKIN-Q. Methods: Concept elicitation interviews were conducted and data were used to draft the SKIN-Q, which was refined with patient and expert feedback. An online sample (i.e., Prolific) provided field-test data. Results: We conducted 26 qualitative interviews (88% women; 65% ≥ 40 years of age). A draft of the SKIN-Q item libraries were formed and revised with input from 12 experts, 11 patients, and 174 online participants who provided 180 survey responses. The psychometric sample of 657 participants (82% women; 36% aged ≥40 years) provided 713 completed surveys (facial, n = 595; body, n = 118). After removing 14 items, the psychometric analysis provided evidence of reliability (≥0.85) and validity for a 20-item set that measures how skin feels and a 46-item set that measures how skin looks. Short-form scales were tested to provide examples for how to utilize the item sets. Conclusion: The SKIN-Q represents an innovative way to measure satisfaction with skin (face and body) in the context of minimally invasive treatments.

Readability analysis and concept mapping of PROMs used for headache disorders.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the readability and the comprehensiveness of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) utilized in primary headache disorders literature. BACKGROUND: As the health-care landscape has evolved toward a patient-centric model, numerous PROMs have been developed to capture treatment outcomes in patients with headache disorders. For these PROMs to advance our understanding of headache disorders and their treatment impact, they must be easy to understand (i.e., reading grade level 6 or less) and comprehensively capture what matters to patients with headache. The aim of this study was to (a) assess the readability of PROMs utilized in headache disorders literature, and (b) assess the comprehensiveness of PROMs by mapping their content to a health-related quality of life framework. METHODS: In this scoping review, recently published systematic reviews were used to identify PROMs used in primary headache disorders literature. Readability analysis was performed at the level of individual items and full PROM using established readability metrics. The content of the PROMs was mapped against a health-related quality-of-life framework by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: In total, 22 PROMs (15 headache disorders related, 7 generic) were included. The median reading grade level varied between 7.1 (interquartile range [IQR] 6.3-7.8) and 12.7 (IQR 11.8-13.2). None of the PROMs were below the recommended reading grade level for patient-facing material (grade 6). Three PROMs, the Migraine-Treatment Assessment Questionnaire, the Eurolight, and the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 3 Level Version, were between reading grade levels 7 and 8; the remaining 19 PROMs were above reading grade level 8. In total, the PROMs included 425 items. Most items (n = 134, 32%) assessed physical function (e.g., work, activities of daily living). The remaining items assessed physical symptoms (n = 127, 30%; e.g., pain, nausea), treatment effects on symptoms (n = 65, 15%; e.g., accompanying symptoms relief, headache relief), treatment impact (n = 56, 13%; e.g., function, side effects), psychological well-being (n = 41, 10%; e.g., anger, frustration), social well-being (n = 29, 7%; e.g., missing out on social activities, relationships), psychological impact (n = 14, 3%; e.g., feeling [not] in control, feeling like a burden), and sexual well-being (n = 3, 1%; e.g., sexual activity, sexual interest). Some of the items pertained to treatment (n = 27, 6%), of which most were about treatment type and use (n = 12, 3%; e.g., medication, botulinum toxin), treatment access (n = 10, 2%; e.g., health-care utilization, cost of medication), and treatment experience (n = 9, 2%; e.g., treatment satisfaction, confidence in treatment). CONCLUSION: The PROMs used in studies of headache disorders may be challenging for some patients to understand, leading to inaccurate or missing data. Furthermore, no available PROM comprehensively measures the health-related quality-of-life impact of headache disorders or their treatment, resulting in a limited understanding of patient-reported outcomes. The development of an easy-to-understand, comprehensive, and validated headache disorders-specific PROM is warranted.

Body Contouring Surgery After Bariatric Surgery Improves Long-Term Health-Related Quality of Life and Satisfaction With Appearance: An International Longitudinal Cohort Study Using the BODY-Q.

OBJECTIVE: To examine health-related quality of life (HRQL) and satisfaction with appearance in patients who have undergone bariatric surgery (BS) with or without subsequent body contouring surgery (BCS) in relation to the general population normative for the BODY-Q. BACKGROUND: The long-term impact of BS with or without BCS has not been established using rigorously developed and validated patient-reported outcome measures. The BODY-Q is a patient-reported outcome measure developed to measure changes in HRQL and satisfaction with appearance in patients with BS and BCS. METHODS: Prospective BODY-Q data were collected from 6 European countries (Denmark, the Netherlands, Finland, Germany, Italy, and Poland) from June 2015 to February 2022 in a cohort of patients who underwent BS. Mixed-effects regression models were used to analyze changes in HRQL and appearance over time between patients who did and did not receive BCS and to examine the impact of patient-level covariates on outcomes. RESULTS: This study included 24,604 assessments from 5620 patients. BS initially led to improved HRQL and appearance scores throughout the first postbariatric year, followed by a gradual decrease. Patients who underwent subsequent BCS after BS experienced a sustained improvement in HRQL and appearance or remained relatively stable for up to 10 years postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent BCS maintained an improvement in HRQL and satisfaction with appearance in contrast to patients who only underwent BS, who reported a decline in scores 1 to 2 years postoperatively. Our results emphasize the pivotal role that BCS plays in the completion of the weight loss trajectory.

"I Want It to Look Natural": Development and Validation of the FACE-Q Aesthetics Natural Module.

BACKGROUND: The concept of "natural" after a facial aesthetic treatment represents an understudied area. We added scales to FACE-Q Aesthetics to provide a means to measure this concept from the patient's perspective. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to develop and validate the FACE-Q Aesthetic Natural module. METHODS: Concept elicitation interviews with people having minimally invasive treatments were conducted to explore the natural concept and develop scales. Patient and expert input refined scale content. An online sample (ie, Prolific) of people who had a facial aesthetic treatment was analyzed with Rasch measurement theory to examine psychometric properties. A test-retest reliability study was performed, and construct validity was examined. RESULTS: Interviews with 26 people were conducted. Three scales were developed and refined with input from 12 experts, 11 patients, and 184 online survey participants. Data from 1358 online participants provided evidence of scale reliability and validity. Reliability was high with person separation index, Cronbach alpha, and intraclass correlation coefficient values without extremes ≥0.82. Tests of construct validity confirmed that the scales functioned as hypothesized. Higher scores on the Expectations scale were associated with how important it was to have a natural look and movement after treatment. In addition, higher scores on the Natural Appearance and Natural Outcome scales correlated with better scores on other FACE-Q Aesthetics scales, and were associated with the face looking and feeling natural and with overall satisfaction with facial appearance. CONCLUSIONS: Many people seeking facial aesthetic treatments want to look natural after treatment. These new FACE-Q Aesthetics scales provide a means to measure the concept of natural from the patient's perspective.

The LIMB-Q: Reliability and Validity of a Novel Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Lower Extremity Trauma Patients.

BACKGROUND: The LIMB-Q is a novel patient-reported outcome measure for lower extremity trauma patients. The aim of this study was to perform a psychometric validation of the LIMB-Q based on the Rasch Measurement Theory. METHODS: An international, multi-site convenience sample of patients with lower extremity traumatic injuries distal to the mid-femur were recruited via clinical sites (United States, Netherlands) and online platforms (English; Trauma Survivors Network, Prolific). A cross-sectional survey of the LIMB-Q was conducted with test-rest (TRT) measured 1-2 weeks after initial completion in a sub-group of patients. RESULTS: The LIMB-Q was field-tested in 713 patients. The mean age was 41 years (standard deviation (SD) 17, range 18-85), mean time from injury was 7 years (SD 9, range 0-58), and there were variable injury and treatment characteristics (39% fracture surgery only, 38% flap or graft, 13% amputation, 10% amputation and flap/graft). Out of 382 items tested, 164 were retained across 16 scales. Reliability was demonstrated with person separation index values 0.80 and greater in 14 scales (0.78-0.79 in remaining 2 scales), Cronbach alpha values 0.83 and greater, and intraclass correlation coefficient values 0.70 and greater. Each scale was unidimensional, measurement invariance was confirmed across clinical and demographic factors, TRT showed adequate reliability, and construct validity was demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: The LIMB-Q is a patient reported outcome measure with 16 independently functioning scales (6-15 items per scale) developed and validated specifically for lower extremity trauma patients with fractures, reconstruction, and/or amputation.

Identifying health-related quality of life concepts to inform the development of the WOUND-Q.

OBJECTIVE: The impact of hard-to-heal wounds extends beyond traditional clinical metrics, negatively affecting a patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Yet treatment outcomes are seldom measured from the patient's perspective. The purpose of the present study was to perform in-depth qualitative interviews with patients diagnosed with varying types of hard-to-heal wounds to identify outcomes important to them. METHOD: Participants were recruited from wound care clinics in Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands and the US, and were included if they had a hard-to-heal wound (i.e., lasting ≥3 months), were aged ≥18 years, and fluent in English, Dutch or Danish. Qualitative interviews took place between January 2016 and March 2017. An interpretive description qualitative approach guided the data analysis. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and coded line-by-line. Codes were categorised into top-level domains and themes that formed the final conceptual framework. RESULTS: We performed 60 in-depth interviews with patients with a range of wound types in different anatomic locations that had lasted from three months to 25 years. Participants described outcomes that related to three top-level domains and 13 major themes: wound (characteristics, healing); HRQoL (physical, psychological, social); and treatment (cleaning, compression stocking, debridement, dressing, hyperbaric oxygen, medication, suction device, surgery). CONCLUSION: The conceptual framework developed as part of this study represents the outcome domains that mattered the most to the patients with hard-to-heal wounds. Interview quotes were used to generate items that formed the WOUND-Q scales, a patient-reported outcome measure for patients with hard-to-heal wounds.

Further psychometric validation and test-retest reproducibility of the WOUND-Q.

WOUND-Q is a condition-specific patient-reported outcome measure developed for all types of chronic wounds, located anywhere on the body. To establish reliability and validity of a patient-reported outcome measure, multiple pieces of evidence are required. The purpose of this study was to examine the measurement properties of 9 of the 13 WOUND-Q scales and perform a test-retest reproducibility study in an international sample. In August 2022, we invited members of an international online community (Prolific.com) with any type of chronic wound to complete a survey containing the WOUND-Q scales, the Wound-QoL and EQ-5D. A test-retest survey was performed 7 days after the first survey. It was possible to examine the reliability and validity of eight of the nine WOUND-Q scales by Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT). To examine test-retest reproducibility intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), the standard error of the measurement and the smallest detectable change were calculated. In total, 421 patients from 22 different countries with 11 different types of chronic wounds took part in this study. Our analyses provided further evidence of the reliability and validity of the scales measuring wound characteristics (assessment, drainage, smell), health-related quality of life (life impact, psychological, sleep, social) and wound treatment (dressing).