Development of a core domain set for ankle osteoarthritis: An international consensus study of patients and health professionals.

OBJECTIVES: To develop an internationally agreed-upon core domain set for ankle osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: In a three-part Delphi process, a group of multidisciplinary health professionals with expertise in ankle OA and people with ankle OA responded to online questionnaires. The questionnaires proposed a list of 29 candidate domains derived from a systematic review of ankle OA research, and interviews with people with ankle OA and health professionals. Consensus was defined a priori as ≥70% agreement in people with ankle OA and health professionals whether a domain should or should not be included in a core domain set. An online consensus meeting was held to discuss and resolve undecided candidate domains. RESULTS: A total of 100 people (75 health professionals and 25 people with ankle OA) from 18 countries (4 continents) participated in this study. Five domains reached consensus for inclusion in a core domain set for ankle OA - pain severity, health-related quality of life, function, disability and ankle range of motion. Twenty-one candidate domains reached agreement not to be included in the core domain set, and three domains remained undecided (ankle instability, physical capacity, and mental health). CONCLUSION: This international consensus study, which included people with ankle OA and health professionals, has established a core domain set for ankle OA with five domains that should be measured and reported in all ankle OA trials - pain severity, health-related quality of life, function, disability and ankle range of motion. This core domain set will guide the reporting of outcomes in clinical trials on ankle OA. Future research should determine which outcome measurement instruments should be used to measure each of the core domains.

Definitions of and Instruments for Disease Activity, Remission, and Relapse in Polymyalgia Rheumatica: A Systematic Literature Review.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic literature review on definitions and instruments used to measure remission, relapse, and disease activity in polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR), to inform an OMERACT project to endorse instruments for these outcomes. METHODS: A search of Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Epistemonikos was performed May 2021 and updated August 2023. Qualitative and quantitative studies published in English were included if they recruited people with isolated PMR regardless of treatment. Study selection and data extraction was performed independently by two investigators and disagreement was resolved through discussion. Data extracted encompassed definitions of disease activity, remission and relapse, and details regarding the instruments used to measure these outcomes. RESULTS: From the 5,718 records, we included 26 articles on disease activity, 36 on remission, and 53 on relapse; 64 studies were observational and 15interventional, and none used qualitative methods. Some heterogeneity was found regarding definitions and instruments encompassing the domains pain, stiffness, fatigue, laboratory markers (mainly acute phase reactants), and patient and physician global assessment of disease activity. However, instruments for clinical signs were often poorly described. Whilst measurement properties of the polymyalgia rheumatica activity score (PMR-AS) have been assessed, data to support its use for measurement of remission and relapse is limited. CONCLUSION: Remission, relapse, and disease activity have been defined heterogeneously in clinical studies. Instruments to measure these disease states still need to be validated. Qualitative research is needed to better understand the concepts of remission and relapse in PMR. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO identification: CRD42021255925.

Clinical impact of gender and age at onset on disease trajectory in primary progressive multiple sclerosis patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Primary-progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS) is characterized by gradual neurological deterioration without relapses. This study aimed to investigate the clinical impact of gender and age at disease onset on disease progression and disability accumulation in patients with this disease phenotype. METHODS: Secondary data from the RelevarEM registry, a longitudinal database in Argentina, were analyzed. The cohort comprised patients with PPMS who met inclusion criteria. Statistical analysis with multilevel Bayesian robust regression modeling was conducted to assess the associations between gender, age at onset, and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score trajectories. RESULTS: We identified 125 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of PPMS encompassing a total of 464 observations. We found no significant differences in EDSS scores after 10 years of disease progression between genders (-0.08; credible interval (CI): -0.60, 0.42). A 20-year difference in age at onset did not show significant differences in EDSS score after 10 years of disease progression (0.281; CI: -0.251, 0.814). Finally, we also did not find any clinically relevant difference between gender EDSS score with a difference of 20 years in age at onset (-0.021; CI: -0.371, 0.319). CONCLUSION: Biological plausibility of gender and age effects does not correlate with clinical impact measured by EDSS score.

Individualized center-based analysis of urinary and sexual functional outcome after radical prostatectomy based on the prostate cancer outcome study: a post hoc pathway to patient outcome measurement analysis for quality improvement.

PURPOSE: We evaluate differences of patient-reported outcome measurements (PROM) based urinary continence and sexual function 12 months after radical prostatectomy (RPE) based on perioperative, surgical, and patient-specific characteristics in a large European academic urology center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All men enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Outcome Study (PCO) study who were treated with RPE between 2017 and 2021 completed EPIC-26 information surveys before and 12 months after RPE. Survey data were linked to clinical data of our institution. Logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the correlation between individual surgeons, patient characteristics, patient clinical data, and their urinary continence and sexual function. RESULTS: In total, data of 429 men were analyzed: unstratified mean (SD) EPIC-26 domain score for urinary function decreased from 93.3 (0.7) to 60.4 (1.5) one year after RPE, respectively for sexual function from 64.95 (1.6) to 23.24 (1.1). Patients with preoperative adequate urinary function (EPIC-26 score > 80) reported significantly different mean urinary function scores between 53.35 (28.88) and 66.25 (25.15), p= 0.001, stratified by surgeons experience. On binary logistic regression analyses, only nerve sparing techniques (OR: 1,83, 95% CI: 1.01;3.21; p = 0.045) and low body mass index (OR: 0.91, CI: 0.85;0.99, p= 0.032) predicted adequate postoperative urinary function. CONCLUSIONS: The results show how using provider-specific data from a larger cohort study enables to develop institution-specific analysis for functional outcomes after RPE. These models can be used for internal quality improvement as well as enhanced and provider-specific patient communication and shared decision making.

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

PURPOSE: Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024. METHODS: The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement. RESULTS: From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts. CONCLUSION: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Understanding the influence of different proxy perspectives in explaining the difference between self-rated and proxy-rated quality of life in people living with dementia: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Proxy assessment can be elicited via the proxy-patient perspective (i.e., asking proxies to assess the patient's quality of life (QoL) as they think the patient would respond) or proxy-proxy perspective (i.e., asking proxies to provide their own perspective on the patient's QoL). This review aimed to identify the role of the proxy perspective in explaining the differences between self-rated and proxy-rated QoL in people living with dementia. METHODS: A systematic literate review was conducted by sourcing articles from a previously published review, supplemented by an update of the review in four bibliographic databases. Peer-reviewed studies that reported both self-reported and proxy-reported mean QoL estimates using the same standardized QoL instrument, published in English, and focused on the QoL of people with dementia were included. A meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize the mean differences between self- and proxy-report across different proxy perspectives. RESULTS: The review included 96 articles from which 635 observations were extracted. Most observations extracted used the proxy-proxy perspective (79%) compared with the proxy-patient perspective (10%); with 11% of the studies not stating the perspective. The QOL-AD was the most commonly used measure, followed by the EQ-5D and DEMQOL. The standardized mean difference (SMD) between the self- and proxy-report was lower for the proxy-patient perspective (SMD: 0.250; 95% CI 0.116; 0.384) compared to the proxy-proxy perspective (SMD: 0.532; 95% CI 0.456; 0.609). CONCLUSION: Different proxy perspectives affect the ratings of QoL, whereby adopting a proxy-proxy QoL perspective has a higher inter-rater gap in comparison with the proxy-patient perspective.

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

PURPOSE: Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024. METHODS: The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement. RESULTS: From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts. CONCLUSION: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Understanding factors impacting patient-reported outcome measures integration in routine clinical practice: an umbrella review.

PURPOSE: Patient-report outcome measures (PROMs) have gained widespread support as a mechanism to improve healthcare quality. We aimed to map out key enablers and barriers influencing PROMs implementation strategies in routine clinical practice. METHODS: An umbrella review was conducted to identify reviews exploring enablers and barriers related to the integration of PROMs in routine clinical practice from January 2000 to June 2023. Information on key enablers and barriers was extracted and summarised thematically according to the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: 34 reviews met our criteria for inclusion. Identified reviews highlighted barriers such as limited PROMs awareness among clinicians and patients, perceived low value by clinicians and patients, PROMs that were too complex or difficult for patients to complete, poor usability of PROMs systems, delayed feedback of PROMs data, clinician concerns related to use of PROMs as a performance management tool, patient concerns regarding privacy and security, and resource constraints. Enablers encompassed phased implementation, professional training, stakeholder engagement prior to implementation, clear strategies and goals, 'change champions' to support PROMs implementation, systems to respond to issues raised by PROMs, and integration into patient pathways. No consensus favoured paper or electronic PROMs, yet offering both options to mitigate digital literacy bias and integrating PROMs into electronic health records emerged as important facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: The sustainable implementation of PROMs is a complex process that requires multicomponent organisational strategies covering training and guidance, necessary time and resources, roles and responsibilities, and consultation with patients and clinicians.

Methodological quality of 100 recent systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments: an overview of reviews.

PURPOSE: Systematic reviews evaluating and comparing the measurement properties of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) play an important role in OMI selection. Earlier overviews of review quality (2007, 2014) evidenced substantial concerns with regards to alignment to scientific standards. This overview aimed to investigate whether the quality of recent systematic reviews of OMIs lives up to the current scientific standards. METHODS: One hundred systematic reviews of OMIs published from June 1, 2021 onwards were randomly selected through a systematic literature search performed on March 17, 2022 in MEDLINE and EMBASE. The quality of systematic reviews was appraised by two independent reviewers. An updated data extraction form was informed by the earlier studies, and results were compared to these earlier studies' findings. RESULTS: A quarter of the reviews had an unclear research question or aim, and in 22% of the reviews the search strategy did not match the aim. Half of the reviews had an incomprehensive search strategy, because relevant search terms were not included. In 63% of the reviews (compared to 41% in 2014 and 30% in 2007) a risk of bias assessment was conducted. In 73% of the reviews (some) measurement properties were evaluated (58% in 2014 and 55% in 2007). In 60% of the reviews the data were (partly) synthesized (42% in 2014 and 7% in 2007); evaluation of measurement properties and data syntheses was not conducted separately for subscales in the majority. Certainty assessments of the quality of the total body of evidence were conducted in only 33% of reviews (not assessed in 2014 and 2007). The majority (58%) did not make any recommendations on which OMI (not) to use. CONCLUSION: Despite clear improvements in risk of bias assessments, measurement property evaluation and data synthesis, specifying the research question, conducting the search strategy and performing a certainty assessment remain poor. To ensure that systematic reviews of OMIs meet current scientific standards, more consistent conduct and reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs is needed.

Cognitive testing of the Children's Palliative Outcome Scale (C-POS) with children, young people and their parents/carers.

BACKGROUND: The Children's Palliative Outcome Scale (C-POS) is being developed using best methodological guidance on outcome measure development, This recommends cognitive testing, an established method of item improvement, prior to psychometric testing. AIM: To cognitively test C-POS within the target population to establish comprehensibility, comprehensiveness, relevance and acceptability. DESIGN: Cross-sectional cognitive interview study following COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology and Rothrock guidance on outcome measure development. Cognitive interviews were conducted using 'think aloud' and verbal probing techniques. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Children 5-⩽17 years old with life-limiting conditions and parents/carers of children with life-limiting conditions were recruited from 14 UK sites. RESULTS: Forty-eight individuals participated (36 parents; 12 children) in cognitively testing the five versions of C-POS over two to seven rounds. Content and length were acceptable, and all questions were considered important. Refinements were made to parent/carer versions to be inclusive of non-verbal children such as changing 'share' to 'express' feelings; and 'being able to ask questions' to 'having the appropriate information'. Changes to improve comprehensibility of items such as 'living life to the fullest' were also made. Parents reported that completing an outcome measure can be distressing but this is anticipated and that being asked is important. CONCLUSION: Cognitive interviewing has facilitated refinement of the C-POS, especially for non-verbal children who represent a large proportion of those with a life-limiting condition. This study has enhanced the face and content validity of the measure and provided preliminary evidence for acceptability for use in routine practice.

Translating the Cluster Headache Quality of Life Questionnaire (CHQ) from English to Dutch with the TRAPD method.

OBJECTIVE: Cluster headache is associated with a decreased quality of life (QoL). The increased focus on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) has led to the creation of a tailored Cluster Headache Quality of Life scale (CHQ). Our objective was to create and authenticate a Dutch version of the CHQ (CHQ-D). METHODS: The TRAPD model (Translation, Review, Adjudication, Pretesting, Documentation) was used to translate the CHQ from English to Dutch and ensure cross-cultural adaption. Pre-testing was performed in n = 31 participants, and validity was in a new sample of n = 40 participants who completed the CHQ twice at a 2-day interval. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha were used to assess the validity and reproducibility of the CHQ-D. RESULTS: To produce the CHQ-D, we made five modifications based on pretesting. Participants finished the questionnaire in a median time of 10 min (IQR:10.0, 17.5) and 90% within 20 min. The majority of participants (74.2%) did not find it burdensome at all. The reliability of the CHQ-D was excellent (Cronbach's alpha: 0.94; ICC: 0.94). CONCLUSION: The CHQ-D is a valid and practical instrument for QoL in individuals with cluster headache. We aim to use CHQ-D as PROM in clinical research in the Netherlands to enforce international collaborations and comparisons of studies.

The Finnish versions of food allergy quality of life questionnaires including parent form 10.

AIM: Examining health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is important to improve patient care. In this study, we translate and evaluate the Finnish versions of the Food Allergy Specific Quality of Life Questionnaires (FAQLQs) from a Finnish perspective and undertake a detailed evaluation of the 10-question Parent Form Questionnaire (FAQLQ-PF10). METHODS: This validation study was performed to evaluate the Finnish versions of the FAQLQs. Validation was performed by analysing clinical characteristics, factor loadings and Cronbach's α reliability estimates. The inclusion criteria for participants in this study were having a doctor-diagnosed food allergy or being a parent of a child with a doctor-diagnosed food allergy and being able to answer the questionnaire in Finnish. RESULTS: Altogether, 247 questionnaires were completed in this study. Most of the respondents had multiple food allergies (77%, 189/247). Spearman's correlations related to the 10-question parent form (FAQLQ-PF10), the 30-question parent form (FAQLQ-PF) and the Food Allergy Severity Measurement-Parent Form (FAIM-PF) were statistically significant (p value = 0.000-0.007). The reliability of the Finnish versions of the FAQLQs measured by Cronbach's α was overall good (0.75-0.981). CONCLUSION: The Finnish versions of the FAQLQs are reliable and suitable to use, and the FAQLQ-PF10 has good usability.

The implementation and impacts of the Comprehensive Care Standard in Australian acute care hospitals: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive care (CC) is becoming a widely acknowledged standard for modern healthcare as it has the potential to improve health service delivery impacting both patient-centred care and clinical outcomes. In 2019, the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care mandated the implementation of the Comprehensive Care Standard (CCS). However, little is known about the implementation and impacts of the CCS in acute care hospitals. Our study aimed to explore care professionals' self-reported knowledge, experiences, and perceptions about the implementation and impacts of the CCS in Australian acute care hospitals. METHODS: An online survey using a cross-sectional design that included Australian doctors, nurses, and allied health professionals in acute care hospitals was distributed through our research team and organisation, healthcare organisations, and clinical networks using various methods, including websites, newsletters, emails, and social media platforms. The survey items covered self-reported knowledge of the CCS and confidence in performing CC, experiences in consumer involvement and CC plans, and perceptions of organisational support and impacts of CCS on patient care and health outcomes. Quantitative data were analysed using Rstudio, and qualitative data were analysed thematically using Nvivo. RESULTS: 864 responses were received and 649 were deemed valid responses. On average, care professionals self-reported a moderate level of knowledge of the CCS (median = 3/5) and a high level of confidence in performing CC (median = 4/5), but they self-reported receiving only a moderate level of organisational support (median = 3/5). Only 4% (n = 17) of respondents believed that all patients in their unit had CCS-compliant care plans, which was attributed to lack of knowledge, motivation, teamwork, and resources, documentation issues, system and process limitations, and environment-specific challenges. Most participants believed the CCS introduction improved many aspects of patient care and health outcomes, but also raised healthcare costs. CONCLUSION: Care professionals are confident in performing CC but need more organisational support. Further education and training, resources, multidisciplinary collaboration, and systems and processes that support CC are needed to improve the implementation of the CCS. Perceived increased costs may hinder the sustainability of the CCS. Future research is needed to examine the cost-effectiveness of the implementation of the CCS.

Using normalization process theory to evaluate the use of patient-centred outcome measures in specialist palliative home care-a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Standardised use of patient-centred outcome measures (PCOMs) improves aspects of quality of care. Normalization Process Theory (NPT) considers the social (inter-)actions of implementation processes operationalised through four constructs: coherence-building, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring. The aim of the study was to identify barriers and enablers for the successful use of PCOMs in specialist palliative home care (SPHC) using NPT, to collect clinically meaningful and reliable data to improve patient outcomes. METHODS: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with palliative care professionals from German SPHC teams who participated in a study using PCOMs. Data were analysed using Framework analysis, and contextualised within NPT. RESULTS: Seventeen interviews across five teams were conducted. Some teams already had an understanding of what PCOMs are and how to use them, based on previous experience. In other teams, this understanding developed through the perception of the benefits (coherence). Participation and engagement depended on individuals and was decisive for coherence-building. The attitude of the management level also played a major role (cognitive participation). Integration of PCOMs into everyday clinical practice varied and depended on the manifestation of the first two constructs and other already established routines (collective action). In the context of appraisal, both positive (e.g. focus on patient) and negative aspects (e.g. additional work) of using PCOMs were mentioned (reflexive monitoring). CONCLUSIONS: Although benefits of using PCOMs were partly recognised, not all teams continued standardised use. Here, not only the social (inter-)actions, but also the influence of the context (working environment) were decisive. Future implementation strategies should consider integrating PCOMs in existing electronic patient records, education sessions supporting coherence-building, internal facilitators/local champions, and ensuring frequent data analyses as it is beneficial and increases the readiness of using PCOMs.

Response to Biologic Therapy in Skin of Colour Participants With Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis and Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review.

There has been a call to action to enhance representation of non-white individuals in dermatology clinical trials. Investigations in differential response to treatment across populations are limited, particularly in conditions of commonality, impact, distinct presentation, and diagnosis in non-white participants, such as atopic dermatitis and psoriasis. This systematic review summarized and identified if biologic treatment outcomes in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis and psoriasis varied in skin of colour (SOC) participants in phase 3 trials. MEDLINE, COCHRANE, and EMBASE databases were used to conduct the search following PROSPERO registration. Following screening of 3209 articles, 11 studies were collected with 1781 SOC participants with a mean age of 40.99 ± 6.3 years (range: 30.6-51.6 years). Male participants accounted for 76.9% (n = 1370/1781) of the sample, and Chinese, Japanese, Taiwanese, and Korean participants accounted for 64.3%, 24.2%, 4.5%, and 3.4% of participants, respectively. Participants with atopic dermatitis were treated with dupilumab (n = 216/388) and participants with psoriasis were treated with adalimumab (n = 313/1393), bimekizumab (n = 62/1393), ixekizumab (n = 13/1393), secukinumab (n = 117/1393), and ustekinumab (n = 289/1393). No significant SOC population-based outcomes were found across treatment groups. However, differences in baseline characteristics or comorbidities were found, suggesting race or ethnic background should be considered when treatment is prescribed in psoriasis or atopic dermatitis. Although no significant SOC participant differential response to treatment were found, large-scale randomized controlled trials investigating comparable treatment outcomes and stratifying results by SOC population in atopic dermatitis and psoriasis are warranted to confirm these findings.

Does lower dose pilocarpine have a role in radiation-induced xerostomia in the modern radiotherapy era? A single-center experience based on patient-reported outcome measures.

PURPOSE: This study aims to investigate the efficacy of lower dose pilocarpine in alleviating late dry mouth symptoms in head and neck cancer patients received radiotherapy. METHODS: Eighteen head and neck cancer patients experiencing persistent dry mouth were enrolled in this study. All participants started pilocarpine treatment a median of 6 months post-radiotherapy. Initially, patients received pilocarpine at 5 mg/day, with a gradual increase to the recommended dose of 15 mg/day. A Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement (PROMs) questionnaire assessed symptoms' severity related to hyposalivation. RESULTS: All patients reported symptomatic dry mouth above grade 2 before starting the medication. Pilocarpine treatment continued based on patients' self-assessment, with a median duration of 12 months (range, 3-36 months). The median daily maintenance dose was 10 mg (range, 5 to 20 mg). Total PROMs scores significantly decreased following medication, from 13 points (range 7-18 points) to 7 points (range 4-13 points) (p = 0.001). Significant improvements were observed in questions related to dry mouth (p < 0.001), water intake during eating (p = 0.01), carrying water (p = 0.01), taste (p < 0.001), and water intake during speech (p < 0.001). Initial and maintenance doses of pilocarpine were lower, and the duration of pilocarpine usage was shorter in patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy compared to conformal radiotherapy (12 months vs. 25 months, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Pilocarpine may be considered at doses lower for late-term dry mouth. With modern radiotherapy techniques effectively preserving the parotid gland, short-term use may be recommended in these patients. Future studies may enhance the development of a more robust patient selection criteria model.

Measuring successful conversations in couples with and without aphasia: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Aphasia impacts communication and relationships. While counselling is increasingly recognised as a component of the speech-language therapy role, the success of conversation partner training is typically measured in terms of communication alone. This scoping review aimed to describe how successful conversation is currently measured with couples-with and without aphasia, to inform the development of an ecologically valid measure for couples with aphasia. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The scoping review was reported in alignment with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extensions for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-SCR). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases were searched for conversation treatment studies for couples with and without aphasia. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were extracted from included studies and screened against the three-tier model of situated language to shortlist those that measure everyday communication. Items within shortlisted PROMs were further described using the refined International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health linking rules. RESULTS: Following screening and full-text review, 46 studies were included, consisting of 24 studies conducted with couples with aphasia and 22 studies conducted with couples without aphasia. For couples with aphasia, 13 PROMs were identified that measured everyday communication. Of these, 23% were dyadic (i.e., measured from the perspectives of both members of the couple); however, they usually only appraised the communication behaviours of the person with aphasia. For couples without aphasia, eight PROMs were identified that measured everyday communication; all were dyadic and measured both attitudes and communication behaviours of both partners. CONCLUSION: Conversation relies on the interaction of two people, and success in conversation is best rated by those having the conversation. The use of PROMs is recommended as part of person and relationship-centred practice; however, there is currently no validated PROM for conversation in aphasia that considers the perspectives and behaviours of both the person with aphasia and their communication partner. The PROM items identified in this study will form the basis of future research to develop a PROM for couples' conversations in aphasia. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Communication partner training (CPT) for couples, where one person has aphasia, can improve conversation skills and enhance relationships. Clinician-rated measures, such as conversation analysis, have been used to measure the outcomes of CPT. However, there is a lack of person-centred or self-rated outcome measurement instruments. that is, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for couples' conversations in aphasia. What this paper adds to existing knowledge We have identified outcome measurement instruments used in conversation treatment studies for couples with and without aphasia. We found that most PROMs used in aphasia treatment studies were not dyadic, that is, they did not include the self-report of both communication partners. In contrast, the PROMs used with couples without aphasia were dyadic and contained items that measured a more complex range of both partners' emotions, behaviours and attitudes. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This study provides insights into the content and characteristics of PROMs for couples' conversation therapy and may assist clinicians in selecting outcome measurement instruments in their practice.

Utility of Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System measures in predicting shoulder arthroplasty in patients with shoulder osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The decision to treat shoulder osteoarthritis (OA) definitively with shoulder arthroplasty (SA) is multifactorial, considering objective findings, subjective information, and patient goals. The first goal of this study was to determine if Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures correlated with patients with shoulder OA who underwent SA within 1 year. The second goal of this study was to determine if score cut-offs in PROMIS domains could further discriminate which shoulder OA patients underwent SA within 1 year. METHODS: This retrospective case-control study examined patients with a diagnosis of shoulder OA who consulted an orthopedic provider from November 1, 2020 to May 23, 2022, and recorded PROMIS measures in the domains of Physical Function, Depression, and/or Pain Interference. A surgical group was defined as patients who underwent SA within 1 year of the most recent PROMIS measures and the nonsurgical patients were defined as the control group. Mean PROMIS scores were compared between the surgical and control groups. Separate logistic regression models controlling for age, race, ethnicity, and comorbidity count were performed for each PROMIS domain as a 1) continuous variable, and then as 2) binary variable defined by PROMIS score cut-off points to determine which scores correlated with undergoing SA to further characterize the potential clinical utility of PROMIS score cut-offs in relating to undergoing SA. RESULTS: The surgical group of 478 patients was older (68.2 vs. 63.8 years), more often of White race (82.6% vs. 70.9%), and less often of Hispanic Ethnicity (1.5% vs. 2.9%) than the control group of 3343 patients. Using optimal cut-offs in PROMIS scores, Pain Interference ≥63 (odds ratio [OR] = 2.97 (2.41-3.64), P < .001), Physical Function ≤39 (OR = 1.81 (95% confidence interval, 1.48-2.22), P < .001), and depression ≥49 (OR = 1.82 (95% confidence interval, 1.50-2.22), P < .001) were all found to correlate with undergoing SA within 1 year in multivariable logistic regressions. CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrate that cut-off scores for PROMIS measures differentiated patients undergoing SA within 1 year. These cut-off scores may have clinical utility in aiding in decision-making regarding surgical candidates for SA. Further research is needed to validate these cut-off scores and determine how they relate to patient outcomes after SA.

The use of lateral lumbar interbody fusion for identifying adult patients with spinal deformities treatable by short corrective fusion in 2-stage surgery.

BACKGROUND: To investigate and compare the surgical outcomes of short and thoracopelvic corrective fusion with our two-stage technique using lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and posterior open surgery. METHODS: Consecutive patients with adult spinal deformities who underwent a planned two-stage anterior-posterior surgery, using LLIF for the first stage and posterior open corrective fusion for the second stage, with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up were included. Patients who underwent lumbar or lumbosacral corrective fusion and thoracopelvic corrective fusion were categorized into the short group and thoracopelvic groups, respectively. We investigated the spinopelvic parameters and patient-reported outcome measurements. RESULTS: Seventy-four consecutive patients (8 men, 66 women; average age, 70.0 years) were included. Ten patients underwent short corrective fusion following significant improvements in the symptoms and radiographic parameters post-LLIF. Several preoperative spinopelvic parameters were better in the short group. Compared to the thoracopelvic group, those who underwent short fusion had a poorer alignment 2 years postoperatively but with comparable results and a significantly higher function score on the Scoliosis Research Society-22 r (SRS-22r) questionnaire. The mean Oswestry Disability Index and SRS-22r scores significantly improved during the 2-year postoperative follow-up in both the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Short corrective fusion can be considered in patients whose symptoms and radiographic parameters significantly improve following LLIF. Patients who undergo short fusion with LLIF application have poorer alignment than those who undergo thoracopelvic fusion 2 years postoperatively; however, the results are comparable, and the function score is significantly improved.

The Use of a Comprehensive Concept of Capability for Wellbeing Assessment: A Best-Fit Framework Synthesis.

Developing an instrument with the capability approach can be challenging, since the capability concept of Sen is ambiguous concerning the burdens that people experience whilst achieving their capabilities. A solution is to develop instruments with a comprehensive concept of capability, such as the concept of 'option-freedom'. This study aims to develop a theoretical framework for instrument development with the concept of option-freedom. A best-fit framework synthesis was conducted with seven qualitative papers by one researcher. Two researchers supported the synthesis by discussing interim results during the synthesis. A priori concepts of option-freedom were used to deductively code against. Themes and subthemes were developed inductively when data did not match a priori themes. Seven paper were identified that fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Four themes emerged from the synthesis. (1) Option Wellbeing represents a range of options that need to be satisfied for individuals to experience wellbeing. (2) Self-Realization represents that there are experiences in an individual's life that have value beyond realizing options. (3) Perceived Access to Options represents the perceived ability of individuals to realize freedoms. (4) Perceived Control represents the experience of having control. Developing an instrument with the proposed framework has two benefits. First, it acknowledges the importance of assessing impediments in realizing capabilities for wellbeing assessment. Secondly, the themes form a broad informational base by including themes related to subjective wellbeing. Future research should study the feasibility of implementing the framework for instrument development.