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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

"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.

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).

Best Practices for FACE-Q Aesthetics Research: A Systematic Review of Study Methodology.

BACKGROUND: The FACE-Q Aesthetics module is a validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that evaluates perspectives on facial aesthetic treatments. Improper administration and poor study methodology can compromise the validity and interpretation of this PROM. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review sought to evaluate the administration and scoring of the FACE-Q Aesthetics scales within the literature. METHODS: A search of Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science was performed on December 20, 2022, with the assistance of a health-research librarian (CRD42022383676). Studies that examined facial aesthetic interventions using the FACE-Q Aesthetics module as a primary or secondary outcome measure were included for analysis. RESULTS: There were 114 studies included. The Face Overall (n = 52, 45.6%), Psychological (n = 45, 39.4%), and Social (n = 43, 37.7%) scales were most frequently reported. Errors in FACE-Q administration were identified in 30 (26.3%) studies. The most common error was the presentation of raw ordinal scores rather than the converted Q score (n = 23). Most studies reported a time horizon for their primary analysis (n = 76, 66.7%); however, only 4 studies provided a rationale for this selection. Sample size calculations for the primary outcome were rarely performed (n = 9, 7.9%). CONCLUSIONS: There continues to be limitations in PROM administration and the quality of articles that report FACE-Q Aesthetic scale data. The authors suggest that future investigators using the FACE-Q refer to the User's Guide regarding administration and scoring of this scale, report a rationale for the study time horizon, and provide an a priori sample size calculation for the primary outcome of interest.

Validation of the Dutch Version of the BODY-Q Measuring Appearance, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Experience of Healthcare in Patients Undergoing Bariatric and Body Contouring Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The BODY-Q is a patient-reported outcome measure developed for use in bariatric and body contouring surgery. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to examine the validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the BODY-Q. METHODS: The BODY-Q consists of 163 items in 21 independently functioning scales that measure appearance, health-related quality of life, and experience of care. The data used to validate the Dutch BODY-Q were provided by 2 prospective multicenter cohort studies across 3 hospitals in the Netherlands. The BODY-Q was administered before and after surgery at 3 or 4 months and 12 months. Rasch measurement theory (RMT) analysis was used to evaluate the BODY-Q for targeting, category threshold order, Rasch model fit, Person Separation Index, and differential item functioning by language (original English data vs Dutch data). RESULTS: Data were collected between January 2016 and May 2019. The study included 876 participants, who provided 1614 assessments. Validity was supported by 3 RMT findings: most scales showed good targeting, 160 out of 163 items (98.2%) evidenced ordered thresholds, and 142 out of 163 items (87.1%) fitted the RMT model. Reliability was high with Person Separation Index values >0.70 for 19 out of 21 scales. There was negligible influence of differential item functioning by language on person item locations and the scale scoring. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence for the reliability and validity of the Dutch BODY-Q for use in bariatric and body contouring patients in the Netherlands. The Dutch BODY-Q can be used in (inter)national research and clinical practice.

Comparison of upper extremity lymphedema after sentinel lymph node biopsy and axillary lymph node dissection: patient-reported outcomes in 3044 patients.

PURPOSE: A limited number of studies have examined the impact of type of axillary lymph node surgery on breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) from the patient's perspective. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) on the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in women diagnosed with BCRL using a condition specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM), the LYMPH-Q upper extremity (UE) module. METHODS: Adult women diagnosed with BCRL were identified from the Danish National Health Data Authority database for the period 2008 to 2020 and were sent an online REDCap survey with the LYMPH-Q UE module. Information pertaining to axillary surgery was obtained from an online pathology repository. Multivariable linear regression was used to examine differences in the SLND and ALND groups on the LYMPH-Q UE scale scores. RESULTS: Three thousand and fourty four women with BCRL were included in the analysis. The mean follow-up duration was 8.6 ± 5.15 years (range, 0-36 years). The majority of participants underwent ALND (n = 2805, 92.1%) and only 7.9% (n = 239) received SLND. The mean number of lymph nodes removed in the SLND group was 2.2 ± 1.4. No statistically significant difference was found in the two groups on the LYMPH-Q UE scale scores. CONCLUSION: There is no difference in women with upper extremity lymphedema after SLND or ALND on the LYMPH-Q UE module scales measuring arm symptoms, function, distress, and appearance.

Development and Psychometric Validation of the BREAST-Q Animation Deformity Scale for Women Undergoing an Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of animation deformity on health-related quality of life, a content-specific, valid, and reliable patient-reported outcome measure is needed. This report describes the development and validation of the BREAST-Q Animation Deformity scale. METHODS: Women with breast cancer who had an implant-based reconstruction provided data. In phase 1 (January 2017 and December 2018), qualitive and cognitive patient interviews and expert input were used to develop and refine scale content. In phase 2 (March to June 2019), a field test study with members of the Love Research Army (LRA) was conducted. Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis was used to examine psychometric properties. RESULTS: In phase 1 of the study, qualitative (n = 11) and cognitive (n = 4) interview data and expert input (n = 9) led to the development of a 12-item scale measuring animation deformity. In phase 2, 651 LRA members provided data and 349 participated in a test-retest study. In the RMT analysis, the data fit the Rasch model (X2(96) = 104.06; p = 0.27). The scale's reliability was high, with person separation index and Cronbach alpha values with/without extremes of ≥ 0.84 and ≥ 0.92 respectively, and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92 (95% confidence interval, 0.90-0.94). Mean scores on the Animation Deformity scale varied as predicted across subgroups of participants who reported differing amounts of change in breast appearance when their arms were lifted overhead or when they lifted something heavy, and for increasing happiness with the overall outcome of their breast reconstruction. CONCLUSION: The 12-item Animation Deformity scale forms a new scale in the BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module that can be used in comparative effectiveness research or to inform clinical care.

Development and Psychometric Validation of the BREAST-Q Sensation Module for Women Undergoing Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Reconstructive techniques for restoring sensation to the breast after mastectomy continue to evolve. The BREAST-Q is a patient-reported outcome measure that can be used to evaluate outcomes of breast cancer treatments; however, it previously lacked scales to measure breast sensation. This paper outlines the development and validation of the BREAST-Q Sensation Module. METHODS: Phase 1 (January 2017 through December 2018) involved qualitative and cognitive interviews with women who had undergone breast reconstruction, as well as expert input, to develop and refine the scales. In phase 2 (March through June 2019), Love Research Army (LRA) members completed the scales, and Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis was performed to examine the reliability and validity of the scales. RESULTS: In this study, 36 qualitative and 7 cognitive interviews were conducted, and input from 18 experts was obtained. Three scales were developed to measure breast Symptoms (e.g., throbbing, burning, tingling), Sensation (e.g., feeling with light touch, through clothing, sexually), and Quality of Life impact of sensation loss. In phase 2, 1204 LRA members completed the scales. Data for each scale fit the RMT model. Reliability was high, with Person Separation Index, Cronbach alpha, and intraclass correlation coefficient values of 0.81 or higher (with and without extremes) for all three scales. Mean scores were higher (better) on the Symptoms and Quality of Life impact scales for the participants with unilateral (vs. bilateral) and autologous (vs. alloplastic) reconstruction, and for the participants who were farther out from their reconstruction. CONCLUSION: The BREAST-Q Sensation Module can be used alone or in conjunction with other BREAST-Q scales to inform clinical care and to evaluate outcomes of new surgical approaches to restoration of breast sensation.

Development and Psychometric Validation of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Arm Lymphedema: The LYMPH-Q Upper Extremity Module.

BACKGROUND: A multiphased mixed-methods study was performed to develop and validate a comprehensive patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for arm lymphedema in women with breast cancer (i.e., the LYMPH-Q Upper Extremity Module). METHODS: Qualitative interviews (January 2017 and June 2018) were performed with 15 women to elicit concepts specific to arm lymphedema after breast cancer treatment. Data were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded. Scales were refined through cognitive interviews (October and Decemeber 2018) with 16 patients and input from 12 clinical experts. The scales were field-tested (October 2019 and January 2020) with an international sample of 3222 women in the United States and Denmark. Rasch measurement theory (RMT) analysis was used to examine reliability and validity. RESULTS: The qualitative phase resulted in six independently functioning scales that measure arm symptoms, function, appearance, psychological function, and satisfaction with information and with arm sleeves. In the RMT analysis, all items in each scale had ordered thresholds and nonsignificant chi-square p values. For all the scales, the reliability statistics with and without extremes for the Person Separation Index were 0.80 or higher, Cronbach's alpha was 0.89 or higher, and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficients were 0.92 or higher. Lower (worse) scores on the LYMPH-Q Upper Extremity scales were associated with reporting of more severe arm swelling, an arm problem caused by cancer and/or its treatment, and wearing of an arm sleeve in the past 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The LYMPH-Q Upper Extremity Module can be used to measure outcomes that matter to women with upper extremity lymphedema. This new PROM was designed using a modern psychometric approach and, as such, can be used in research and in clinical care.

Development and Psychometric Validation of BREAST-Q Scales Measuring Cancer Worry, Fatigue, and Impact on Work.

BACKGROUND: The BREAST-Q is a patient-reported outcome measure for women with breast cancer. The aim of this study was to develop new BREAST-Q scales to measure Cancer Worry, Fatigue and Impact on Work. METHODS: Data were collected between January 2017 and November 2019. Phase 1 (qualitative) included participants from Canada and the USA, pre/post any type of breast cancer treatment (surgery, adjuvant, neoadjuvant). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded line-by-line. New scales were drafted and refined through cognitive interviews and expert input. Phase 2 (field-test study) involved USA members of the Love Research Army (LRA). Rasch measurement theory analysis was used to examine reliability and validity. RESULTS: In phase 1, 57 women were interviewed. Three concepts were identified as important to the breast cancer experience that are not currently covered in the BREAST-Q and developed into scales, i.e., Cancer Worry, Fatigue and Impact on Work. Feedback from nine women and 23 experts was used to establish content validity. The scales were field-tested in the LRA sample (n = 1680), of whom 1006 completed a test-retest. Reliability was > 0.81 for the person separation index, > 0.89 for Cronbach's alpha and > 0.83 for interclass correlation coefficients. Lower scores on all three scales were significantly associated with being closer in time to diagnosis and having a higher cancer stage at diagnosis (p < 0.001 on ANOVA). CONCLUSION: These new scales expand the BREAST-Q measurement system and provide a means to evaluate additional important outcomes for breast cancer patients in clinical care and research.

Rasch Analysis of Patient- and Parent-Reported Outcome Measures in the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Standard Set for Cleft Lip and Palate.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric performance of the patient- and parent-reported measures in the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) Standard Set for Cleft Care, and to identify ways of improving concept coverage. METHODS: Data from 714 patients with cleft lip and/or palate, aged 8 to 9, 10 to 12.5, and 22 years were collected between November 2015 and April 2019 at Erasmus University Medical Center, Boston Children's Hospital, Duke Children's Hospital, and from participating sites in the CLEFT-Q Phase 3 study. The Standard Set includes 9 CLEFT-Q scales, the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) questionnaire, the Child Oral Health Impact Profile-Oral Symptoms Scale (COHIP-OSS), and the Intelligibility in Context Scale (ICS). Targeting, item-fit statistics, thresholds for item responses, and measurement precision (PSI) were analyzed using Rasch measurement theory. RESULTS: The proportion of the sample to score within each instruments range of measurement varied from 69% (ICS) to 92% (CLEFT-Q teeth and COHIP-OSS). Specific problems with individual items within the NOSE and COHIP-OSS questionnaires were noted, such as poor item fit to the Rasch model and disordered thresholds (6 of 10). Reliability measured with PSI was above 0.82 for the ICS and all but one CLEFT-Q scale (speech distress). PSIs were lowest for the COHIP-OSS (0.43) and NOSE questionnaire (0.35). CONCLUSION: The patient- and parent-reported components within the facial appearance, psychosocial function, and speech domains are valid measures; however, the facial function and oral health domains are not sufficiently covered by the CLEFT-Q eating and drinking, NOSE, and COHIP-OSS, and these questionnaires may not be accurate enough to stratify cleft-related outcomes.

BODY-Q patient-reported outcomes measure (PROM) to assess sleeve gastrectomy vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: eating behavior, eating-related distress, and eating-related symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Post-operative changes in eating behavior, eating-related distress and eating-related symptoms play an important role in the lives of bariatric surgery patients. However, there are no studies that assess these outcomes using a specifically designed patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. We use our newly developed and validated scales as part of the well-established BODY-Q PROMs to compare laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients (LRYGB). METHODS: We analyzed data from an international multi-center prospective cohort study of patients over 18 who underwent bariatric surgery. We used multivariable linear regression models to assess the difference between LRYGB and LSG for the new BODY-Q scales, which include eating behavior, eating-related distress and eating-related symptoms. All analyses were corrected for significant confounding variables. RESULTS: Out of 1420 patients, 920 underwent LRYGB and 500 underwent LSG. The LRYGB group had a higher percentage total weight loss (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in eating behavior (e.g., stop eating before feeling full, avoiding unhealthy snacks, etc.) or eating-related distress (e.g., feeling ashamed or out of control after eating). Patients who underwent LSG scored significantly better on the post-prandial eating-related symptoms scale (e.g., vomiting, reflux; p < 0.001). Symptoms more prevalent in the LRYGB patients were related to dumping syndrome whereas symptoms more prevalent in LSG patients were related to reflux. CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent LRYGB had a significantly better weight loss after surgery, but they scored worse on post-prandial symptoms in comparison to LSG patients. This information may be relevant for patients in the pre-operative counseling setting, as it may influence their decision for surgical procedure selection.

An international mixed methods study to develop a new preference-based measure for women with breast cancer: the BREAST-Q Utility module.

BACKGROUND: Generic preference-based measures (PBM), though commonly used, may not be optimal for use in economic evaluations of breast cancer interventions. No breast cancer-specific PBM currently exists, and the generic PBMs fail to capture the unique concerns of women with breast cancer (e.g., body image, appearance, treatment-specific adverse effects). Hence, the objective of this study was to develop a breast cancer-specific PBM, the BREAST-Q Utility module. METHODS: Women diagnosed with breast cancer (stage 0-4, any treatment) were recruited from two tertiary hospitals in Canada and one in the US. The study followed an exploratory sequential mixed methods approach, whereby semi-structured interviews were conducted and at the end of the interview, participants were asked to list their top five health-related quality of life (HRQOL) concerns and to rate the importance of each item on the BREAST-Q. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded. Constant comparison was used to refine the codes and develop a conceptual framework. Qualitative and quantitative data were triangulated to develop the content of the Utility module  that was refined through 2 rounds of cognitive debriefing interviews with women diagnosed with breast cancer and feedback from experts. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 57 women aged 55 ± 10 years. A conceptual framework was developed from 3948 unique codes specific to breasts, arms, abdomen, and cancer experience. Five top-level domains were HRQOL (i.e., physical, psychological, social, and sexual well-being) and appearance. Data from the interviews, top 5 HRQOL concerns, and BREAST-Q item ratings were used to inform dimensions for inclusion in the Utility module. Feedback from women with breast cancer (N = 9) and a multidisciplinary group of experts (N = 27) was used to refine the module. The field-test version of the HSCS consists of 10 unique dimensions. Each dimension is measured with 1 or 2 candidate items that have 4-5 response levels each. CONCLUSION: The field-test version of the BREAST-Q Utility module was derived from extensive patient and expert input. This comprehensive approach ensured that the content of the Utility module is relevant, comprehensive, and includes concerns that matter the most to women with breast cancer.

Establishing content validity of an orthodontic subset of the FACE-Q Craniofacial Module in children and young adults with malocclusion.

OBJECTIVE: The FACE-Q Craniofacial Module for children and young adults is a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) designed to measure outcomes for patients aged 8 to 29 years with facial conditions. The aim of this study was to establish content validity of a relevant subset of the module for its use in orthodontic patients with malocclusion. SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Experts in orthodontics were emailed and invited to provide feedback through a Research Electronic Data Capture survey. Patient feedback was obtained through cognitive interviews with patients aged 8 to 29 years recruited from a university-based orthodontic clinic in Canada. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Expert opinion and patient interviews were used to obtain feedback on the content of 4 appearance (face, smile, teeth and jaws) and 1 function (eating and drinking) scales hypothesized to be relevant to orthodontic malocclusions, and to elicit new concepts. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded using a line-by-line approach. RESULTS: Twenty-one experts and 15 patients participated. Expert feedback led us to drop 9, retain 40, revise 4 and add 16 new items. At the conclusion of cognitive interviews no items were dropped, 55 were retained, 5 were revised and 8 new items were added. The final set of 68 items demonstrated content validity for orthodontic patients. CONCLUSION: Expert feedback and cognitive interviews enabled us to revise and refine 5 scales as part of the FACE-Q Craniofacial Module for use in orthodontic patients. These scales were included in the internationalfield-test of the FACE-Q Craniofacial Module.

Recursive Partitioning vs Computerized Adaptive Testing to Reduce the Burden of Health Assessments in Cleft Lip and/or Palate: Comparative Simulation Study.

BACKGROUND: Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) has been shown to deliver short, accurate, and personalized versions of the CLEFT-Q patient-reported outcome measure for children and young adults born with a cleft lip and/or palate. Decision trees may integrate clinician-reported data (eg, age, gender, cleft type, and planned treatments) to make these assessments even shorter and more accurate. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to create decision tree models incorporating clinician-reported data into adaptive CLEFT-Q assessments and compare their accuracy to traditional CAT models. METHODS: We used relevant clinician-reported data and patient-reported item responses from the CLEFT-Q field test to train and test decision tree models using recursive partitioning. We compared the prediction accuracy of decision trees to CAT assessments of similar length. Participant scores from the full-length questionnaire were used as ground truth. Accuracy was assessed through Pearson's correlation coefficient of predicted and ground truth scores, mean absolute error, root mean squared error, and a two-tailed Wilcoxon signed-rank test comparing squared error. RESULTS: Decision trees demonstrated poorer accuracy than CAT comparators and generally made data splits based on item responses rather than clinician-reported data. CONCLUSIONS: When predicting CLEFT-Q scores, individual item responses are generally more informative than clinician-reported data. Decision trees that make binary splits are at risk of underfitting polytomous patient-reported outcome measure data and demonstrated poorer performance than CATs in this study.

Concepts Important to Patients With Facial Differences: A Qualitative Study Informing a New Module of the FACE-Q for Children and Young Adults.

OBJECTIVE: The concepts important to children and young adults who undergo treatments for facial differences are not well-defined. Measurement of treatment outcomes from the patient's perspective is necessary to ensure goals of treatment are met. We aimed to identify concepts important to children and young adults with facial differences through a qualitative study. DESIGN: An interpretive description qualitative approach was followed. Semistructured interviews were conducted, transcribed verbatim, and coded using a line-by-line approach. Qualitative analysis led to the development of a conceptual framework of outcomes important to patients. SETTING: Interviews were conducted in Canada and the United Kingdom at home, by telephone, or in the hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N = 72) were recruited between May and June 2014 from craniofacial clinics at the Hospital for Sick Children (Toronto) and Great Ormond Street Hospital (London). Participants included anyone with a visible and/or functional facial difference aged 8 to 29 years and fluent in English, excluding patients with a cleft. The sample included 38 females and 34 males, with a mean age of 13.9 years, and included 28 facial conditions (11 facial paralysis, 18 ear anomalies, 26 skeletal conditions, and 17 soft tissue conditions). RESULTS: Analysis led to identification of important concepts within 4 overarching domains: facial appearance, facial function, adverse effects of treatment, and health-related quality of life (psychological, social, and school function). CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides an understanding of concepts important to children and young adults with facial differences.