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.

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).

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 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.

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.

The BODY-Q Cellulite Scale: A Development and Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Cellulite is a localized metabolic disorder of the subcutaneous tissue. To measure the impact of cellulite and its treatment(s) on patients' health-related quality of life, a psychometrically sound patient-reported outcome measure is needed. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to develop and field test a new BODY-Q cellulite scale to measure the appearance of cellulite. METHODS: Appearance-related codes from the original BODY-Q qualitative interviews were reexamined, and a set of cellulite-specific items was developed and refined through cognitive patient interviews (n = 10) and expert input (n = 17). This scale was field-tested in adults with cellulite through 2 crowdworking platforms. Rasch Measurement Theory analysis was employed to refine the scale and examine its psychometric properties. RESULTS: The field-test sample included 2129 participants. The 15-item scale was reduced in length to 11 items. Data from the sample fit the Rasch model (X2 [99] = 21.32, P = 0.06). All items had ordered thresholds and mapped out a targeted clinical hierarchy. The reliability statistics for the person separation index was 0.94 and for Cronbach's alpha was 0.97. In terms of validity, worse scores on the cellulite scale were associated with being more bothered by how the cellulite looked overall, having more severe cellulite on the Patient-Reported Photo-numeric Cellulite Severity Scale, and having more self-reported cellulite and more areas of the body with cellulite. CONCLUSIONS: The BODY-Q cellulite scale can be utilized to measure appearance of cellulite and provides a solid basis for future studies evaluating the impact of cellulite and its treatment.

International study to develop the WOUND-Q patient-reported outcome measure for all types of chronic wounds.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for chronic wounds mainly focus on specific types of wounds. Our team developed the WOUND-Q for use with all types of wounds in any anatomic location. We conducted 60 concept elicitation interviews with patients in Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, and the United States. Analysis identified concepts of interest to patients and scales were formed and refined through cognitive interviews with 20 patients and input from 26 wound care experts. Scales were translated into Danish and Dutch. An international field-test study collected data from 881 patients (1020 assessments) with chronic wounds. Rasch measurement theory (RMT) analysis was used to refine the scales and examine psychometric properties. RMT analysis supported the reliability and validity of 13 WOUND-Q scales that measure wound characteristics (assessment, discharge, and smell), health-related quality of life (life impact, psychological, sleep impact, and social), experience of care (information, home care nurses, medical team, and office staff), and wound treatment (dressing and suction device). The WOUND-Q can be used to measure outcomes in research and clinical practice from the perspective of patients with any type of wound.

Patient-reported experience measures are essential to improving quality of care for chronic wounds: An international qualitative study.

Traditional quality measures for chronic wounds have focused on objective outcomes that are challenging to risk adjust, lack patient input, and have limited ability to inform quality improvement interventions. Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) provide information from the patient perspective regarding health care quality and have potential to improve patient-centredness, increase care efficiency, and generate actionable data for quality improvement. The purpose of this study was to understand patient experiences and health care processes that impact quality of care among patients with chronic wounds. Sixty patients at least 18 years of age with various wound aetiologies were recruited from Canada, Denmark, The Netherlands, and the United States as part of a larger phase 1 qualitative study to develop a patient-reported outcome measure for chronic wounds (WOUND-Q). All patients had a chronic wound for at least 3 months, were fluent in their native speaking language, and able to participate in a one-on-one semi-structured interview. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Interpretive description was used to identify recurrent themes relating to patient experience and quality of care. We identified five domains (care coordination, establishing/obtaining care, information delivery, patient-provider interaction, and treatment delivery) and 21 sub-domains (access to patient information, interdisciplinary communication, encounter efficiency, provider availability, specialist referral, staff professionalism, travel/convenience, modality, reciprocity, understandability/consistency, accountability, continuity, credentials, rapport, appropriateness, complication management, continuity, environment/setting, equipment and supply needs, expectation, and patient-centred) as potential opportunities to measure and improve quality of care in the chronic wound population. PREMs for chronic wounds represent an important opportunity to engage patients and longitudinally assess quality across clinical settings and providers. Future research should focus on developing PREMs to complement traditional objective and patient-reported outcome measures for chronic wounds.

The BODY-Q Stretch Marks Scale: A Development and Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Stretch marks are common permanent dermal lesions that can cause psychosocial distress. A number of treatment modalities are available, with the majority targeted towards collagen production. OBJECTIVES: To develop and field test a new BODY-Q scale to measure appearance of stretch marks in order to provide a means to incorporate the patient perspective into future treatment studies. METHODS: We previously described the development of the BODY-Q conceptual framework, which involved a literature review, 63 patient interviews, 22 cognitive interviews and input from 9 experts, and the international field-test study that involved 403 weight loss and 331 body contouring patients. To develop the Stretch Marks scale, we reexamined appearance codes from the original interviews. The scale was field tested in an international study. Rasch measurement theory (RMT) analysis was used to refine the scale and examine measurement properties. RESULTS: The Stretch Marks scale was completed by 630 participants, who provided 774 assessments. After dropping 3 items, the data fit the Rasch model (P = 0.56). Items (eg, length, width, amount, location, up close) mapped out a well-targeted clinical hierarchy. All items had ordered thresholds and good item fit. There was no evidence of differential item functioning (bias) by gender, age group or language (English vs Danish). The scale evidenced high reliability (ie, person separation index = 0.94, Cronbach's alpha = 0.97). For construct validity, the mean score correlated with the total number of body areas with stretch marks, higher BMI before bariatric surgery, and other BODY-Q scales. CONCLUSIONS: This scale could be used to measure the impact of innovative treatments for stretch marks.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

Core Set of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Measuring Quality of Life in Clinical Obesity Care.

PURPOSE: The focus of measuring success in obesity treatment is shifting from weight loss to patients' health and quality of life. The objective of this study was to select a core set of patient-reported outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures to be used in clinical obesity care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Standardizing Quality of Life in Obesity Treatment III, face-to-face hybrid consensus meeting, including people living with obesity as well as healthcare providers, was held in Maastricht, the Netherlands, in 2022. It was preceded by two prior multinational consensus meetings and a systematic review. RESULTS: The meeting was attended by 27 participants, representing twelve countries from five continents. The participants included healthcare providers, such as surgeons, endocrinologists, dietitians, psychologists, researchers, and people living with obesity, most of whom were involved in patient representative networks. Three patient-reported outcome measures (patient-reported outcomes) were selected: the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite (self-esteem) measure, the BODY-Q (physical function, physical symptoms, psychological function, social function, eating behavior, and body image), and the Quality of Life for Obesity Surgery questionnaire (excess skin). No patient-reported outcome measure was selected for stigma. CONCLUSION: A core set of patient-reported outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures for measuring quality of life in clinical obesity care is established incorporating patients' and experts' opinions. This set should be used as a minimum for measuring quality of life in routine clinical practice. It is essential that individual patient-reported outcome measure scores are shared with people living with obesity in order to enhance patient engagement and shared decision-making.