Laparoscopic Versus Open Hemihepatectomy: The ORANGE II PLUS Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: To compare outcomes after laparoscopic versus open major liver resection (hemihepatectomy) mainly for primary or metastatic cancer. The primary outcome measure was time to functional recovery. Secondary outcomes included morbidity, quality of life (QoL), and for those with cancer, resection margin status and time to adjuvant systemic therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized controlled, patient-blinded, superiority trial on adult patients undergoing hemihepatectomy. Patients were recruited from 16 hospitals in Europe between November 2013 and December 2018. RESULTS: Of the 352 randomly assigned patients, 332 patients (94.3%) underwent surgery (laparoscopic, n = 166 and open, n = 166) and comprised the analysis population. The median time to functional recovery was 4 days (IQR, 3-5; range, 1-30) for laparoscopic hemihepatectomy versus 5 days (IQR, 4-6; range, 1-33) for open hemihepatectomy (difference, -17.5% [96% CI, -25.6 to -8.4]; P < .001). There was no difference in major complications (laparoscopic 24/166 [14.5%] v open 28/166 [16.9%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.84; P = .58). Regarding QoL, both global health status (difference, 3.2 points; P < .001) and body image (difference, 0.9 points; P < .001) scored significantly higher in the laparoscopic group. For the 281 (84.6%) patients with cancer, R0 resection margin status was similar (laparoscopic 106 [77.9%] v open 122 patients [84.1%], OR, 0.60; P = .14) with a shorter time to adjuvant systemic therapy in the laparoscopic group (46.5 days v 62.8 days, hazard ratio, 2.20; P = .009). CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing hemihepatectomy, the laparoscopic approach resulted in a shorter time to functional recovery compared with open surgery. In addition, it was associated with a better QoL, and in patients with cancer, a shorter time to adjuvant systemic therapy with no adverse impact on cancer outcomes observed.

The Assessment of Burden of ColoRectal Cancer (ABCRC)-tool; a validity and reliability study.

INTRODUCTION: Follow-up care after treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasingly focused on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and functional outcomes. The Assessment of Burden of ColoRectal Cancer (ABCRC)-tool is developed to measure these outcomes and support patient-oriented care. The tool comprises items assessing burden of disease and lifestyle parameters. It consists of a generic module combined with one of the three CRC specific modules. The objective of this study is to assess the construct validity and reliability of the items of the ABCRC-tool. METHODS: Patients who were receiving follow-up care after surgical CRC treatment were invited to complete the ABCRC-tool together with other validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Construct validity was assessed by testing expected correlations between items of the ABCRC-tool and domains of other PROMs and by examining predefined hypotheses regarding differences in subgroups of patients. Patients completed the ABCRC-tool twice, with 8 days apart, to evaluate its reliability. RESULTS: In total, 177 patients participated (64% male) with a mean age of 67 years (range 33-88). The colon, rectum and stoma module were completed by subsequently 89, 53 and 35 patients. Most items correlated as expected with anticipated domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30 or EORTC QLQ-CR29 (all p-values <0.05). Furthermore, the ABCRC-tool could discriminate between subgroups of patients. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was good (>0.70) for most items, indicating good reliability. CONCLUSION: The ABCRC-tool is a valid and reliable instrument that is ready for use in a clinical setting to support personalized follow-up care after CRC treatment.

English translation and cross-cultural validation of the patient-reported outcome measurement-haemorrhoidal impact and satisfaction score (PROM-HISS).

AIM: The aim of this study was to translate the Dutch patient-reported outcome measure-haemorrhoidal impact and satisfaction score (PROM-HISS) to English and perform a cross-cultural validation. METHOD: The ISPOR good practice guidelines for the cross-cultural validation of PROMs were followed and included two steps: (1) Two forward and two backward translations. The forward translation concerned the translation from the source language (Dutch) to the target language (English), performed by two independent English speakers, one medical doctor and one nonmedical. Subsequently, a discussion about discrepancies in the reconciled version was performed by a stakeholder group. (2) Cognitive interviews were held with patients with haemorrhoidal disease (HD), probing the comprehensibility and comprehensiveness of the PROM-HISS. RESULTS: Discrepancies in the reconciled forward translation concerned the terminology of HD symptoms. Furthermore, special attention was paid to the response options, ranging from "not at all", indicating minor symptoms, to "a lot", implying many symptoms. Consensus among the stakeholder group about the final version of the translated PROM-HISS was reached. Interviews were conducted with 10 native English-speaking HD patients (30% female), with a mean age of 44 years (24-83) and primarily diagnosed with grade II HD (80%). The mean time to complete the PROM-HISS was 1 min 43 s. Patients showed a good understanding of the questions and response options, found all items relevant and did not miss important symptoms or topics. CONCLUSION: The translated English language PROM-HISS is a valid tool to assess symptoms of HD, its impact on daily activities and patient satisfaction with HD treatment.

Responsiveness of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measure-Haemorrhoidal Impact and Satisfaction Score in patients with haemorrhoidal disease.

AIM: In this study we aimed to assess the responsiveness of the symptom score of the recently developed Patient-Reported Outcome Measure-Haemorrhoidal Impact and Satisfaction Score (PROM-HISS). Furthermore, the minimally relevant difference (MRD) was determined. METHOD: The responsiveness of PROM-HISS was tested using a criterion-based (i.e. anchor) and construct-based (i.e. hypotheses testing) approach. Patients with haemorrhoidal disease (HD) completed the PROM-HISS before and 1 week after treatment in hospital. A global self-assessment of change question (SCQ) was administered 1-week after treatment and functioned as the criterion. The following analyses were performed: (1) correlation between the PROM-HISS symptom score and the criterion (SCQ) and (2) hypotheses testing. The MRD was determined as change in symptoms of the subgroup reporting 'somewhat fewer complaints' on the SCQ. RESULTS: Between February and August 2022, 94 patients with grade II-IV HD from three hospitals were included. The correlation between the SCQ and a change on the PROM-HISS symptom score was 0.595 indicating that an improvement on the SCQ corresponds to an improvement on the PROM-HISS symptom score. As hypothesized, the mean change in PROM-HISS scores was significantly different between subgroups of patients based on their SCQ responses. Patients reporting a small change in HD symptoms on the SCQ corresponded to a mean change of 0.3 on the PROM-HISS symptom score. CONCLUSION: The PROM-HISS symptom score is a responsive instrument as it identifies change in HD symptoms because of treatment. The estimated MRD of 0.3 can be used to inform clinical research and practice.

Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for the optimisation of treatment and follow-up of patients with an anorectal malformation (ARM): The ARM and OUtcome Review (ARMOUR)-project.

BACKGROUND: Primary treatment of an anorectal malformation (ARM) is surgical restoration of the anatomy. These children can experience many problems later in life; therefore, a long-term follow-up by an experienced team is needed. The aim of the ARM and OUtcome Review (ARMOUR-study) is to identify the lifetime outcomes that are important from a medical and patients' perspective and develop a core outcome set (COS) that can be implemented in a care pathway to support individual ARM management decisions. METHODS: First, a systematic review will identify clinical and patient-reported outcomes described in studies conducted in patients with an ARM. Second, qualitative interviews with patients of different age categories and their caregivers will be held to ensure that the COS will include outcomes that are relevant from the patient's perspective. Finally, the outcomes will be taken forward to a Delphi consensus exercise. Using multiple web-based Delphi rounds, key stakeholders (medical experts, clinical researchers and patients) will prioritise outcomes. During a face-to-face consensus meeting, the final COS will be determined. These outcomes can be evaluated in a life-long care pathway for patients with ARM. DISCUSSION: The development of a COS for ARMs aims to reduce heterogeneity in outcome reporting between (clinical) studies, enhancing the availability of comparable data, which will facilitate evidence-based patient care. Assessment of the outcomes in the COS during individual care pathways for ARM can support shared decisions regarding management. The ARMOUR-project has ethical approval and is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Treatment study level II.

Picking Up the Threads: Long-Term Outcomes of the Sutured Haemorrhoidopexy: A Retrospective Single-Centre Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the short- and long-term safety and efficacy of the sutured haemorrhoidopexy (SH) in patients with haemorrhoidal disease (HD). METHODS: A retrospective study was performed, assessing the following treatment characteristics: number of sutures needed; operation time; perioperative complications; postoperative pain; hospital stay. The short- and long-term postoperative complications, HD recurrence and data on current HD symptoms were assessed according to the Core Outcome Set for HD. RESULTS: Between January 2009 and December 2021, 149 patients with HD underwent a SH. One-hundred and forty-five patients were included, with a mean age of 61 years (±12.8), of which 70 were women (48.3%). Patients were predominantly diagnosed with grade III (37.2%) HD and the median follow-up was nine years (5-11). Perioperative complications occurred in four cases (2.8%). In two patients (1.4%), short-term postoperative complications were reported, and in seven patients (6.2%), long-term complications were reported. The cumulative efficacy in terms of freedom of recurrence was 88.3% (95% CI, 83.1-93.5) at six months, 80.0% (95% CI, 73.5-86.5) at one year, and 67.7% (95% CI, 59.7-75.7) at five years. CONCLUSIONS: Sutured haemorrhoidopexy is a safe treatment for patients with HD and can be proposed as a minimally invasive surgical treatment if basic and outpatient procedures fail.

The effectiveness of health education interventions on cervical cancer prevention in Africa: A systematic review.

Low levels of knowledge and awareness on cervical cancer play a role in limiting cervical cancer prevention uptake. This systematic review aimed to identify effective educational interventions to increase cervical cancer awareness, knowledge, and subsequently screening or vaccination uptake in African women. A literature search was conducted in Medline and EMBASE databases. We examined original, peer-reviewed English literature published between 2005 and 2020. Nineteen studies examining health education interventions' impact on awareness, knowledge, and screening or vaccination uptake in African women were included. Ten studies were controlled trials, nine performed pre- and post-measurements in one group. Most studies were published between 2015 and 2020 (86%), many were from Nigeria (47%). Studies were mostly set up in communities and schools. The most frequently used intervention was lectures, alone or combined with videos and practical demonstrations. Sixteen studies evaluated knowledge or awareness, and all showed a statistically significant improvement following the intervention. Of the ten studies that evaluated screening uptake, either as the single outcome or combined with knowledge or awareness, six found a significant rise in screening uptake after intervention. Educational interventions increased knowledge and awareness in African women, some boosted uptake of cervical cancer screening, especially when using peer health educators and culturally tailored methods. Innovative approaches such as self-collected HPV testing and mHealth also demonstrated a potential to increase uptake of screening. More research is needed to identify and analyse barriers to screening uptake, which can still be present even after a successful educational intervention.

The patient perspective on the preoperative colorectal cancer care pathway and preparedness for surgery and postoperative recovery-a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore colorectal cancer (CRC) patients' perspectives and experiences regarding the preoperative surgical care pathway and their subsequent preparedness for surgery and postoperative recovery. METHODS: CRC patients were recruited using purposive sampling and were interviewed three times (preoperatively, and 6 weeks and 3 months postoperatively) using semistructured telephone interviews. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and analysed independently by two researchers using thematic analysis with open coding. RESULTS: Data saturation was achieved after including 18 patients. Preoperative factors that contributed to a feeling of preparedness for surgery and recovery were patient-centred- and professional healthcare organization, sincere and personal guidance, and thorough information provision. Postoperatively, patients with complications or physical complaints experienced unmet information needs regarding the impact of complications and what to expect from postoperative recovery. CONCLUSIONS: The preoperative period is a vital period to prepare patients for surgery and recovery in which patients most value personalized information, personal guidance and professionalism. According to CRC patients, the feeling of preparedness for surgery and recovery can be improved by continually providing dosed information. This information should provide the patient with patient-tailored perspectives regarding the impact of (potential) complications and what to expect during recovery.

Development and content validation of the Assessment of Burden of ColoRectal Cancer (ABCRC)-tool.

BACKGROUND: It is essential to include patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life and symptom burden, in follow-up care of colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors. These outcomes are most valuable when they are discussed with patients and used to guide follow-up care. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate the Assessment of Burden of Colorectal cancer (ABCRC)-tool: a tool that includes a patient-reported questionnaire covering the experienced burden of colorectal cancer, assessment of lifestyle parameters, visualisation of the results, and treatment advice. METHODS: A 5-step method was used to develop the ABCRC-tool: (1) definition of the experienced burden of CRC, (2) determination of the components of experienced burden, (3) formulation of the instrument preconditions, (4) literature study on existing instruments, (5) development of an integrated instrument. Content validity was evaluated by think-aloud interviews with 11 patients and 22 healthcare professionals (HCPs). RESULTS: The ABCRC-tool consists of a generic module and three CRC specific modules with items related to experienced disease burden, and lifestyle. The CRC specific modules are available for both colon and rectal cancer patients with anastomosis, and patients with a stoma. An algorithm with cut-off points was developed to visualise outcomes and offer treatment advice based on (inter)national guidelines. The evaluation of content led to a few minor amendments. CONCLUSION: The ABCRC-tool is a product of close cooperation between patients and HCPs and has good face and content validity. It is aimed to incorporate PROs in treatment decisions in oncological care.

Living with cryptoglandular anal fistula: a qualitative investigation of the patient's experience through semi-structured patient interviews.

PURPOSE: Cryptoglandular anal fistula continues to be a subject of extensive surgical research due to the lack of effective and enduring treatments, some of which incur risks to continence and quality of life. However, the patient experience of disease has seldom been reported. The aims of this study are to understand the impact of living with a fistula and the treatment outcomes that are valued by patients. METHODS: Patients with cryptoglandular anal fistula were recruited using purposive sampling from two tertiary referral centres in the UK and the Netherlands. Patients underwent semi-structured interviews that were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Dutch transcripts were translated into English and underwent independent, thematic analysis using open coding by two study team members to identify common themes and sub-themes. RESULTS: Twenty interviews were conducted before saturation was reached (11 male, median age 49, Interquartile range 39-55 years). Four broad themes emerged, covering the physical symptoms of fistula, the patient journey towards understanding the condition, life impact, and treatment. Several inter-related sub-themes were found, reflecting the extensive impact and adjustment that the disease entails. CONCLUSION: The impact of cryptoglandular anal fistula extends beyond the physical symptoms of pain and discharge, requires significant readjustment, and often negatively impacts psycho-social wellbeing. These aspects of disease should receive greater attention in future assessment of treatment and quality of life.

Patient reported outcome measure-haemorrhoidal impact and satisfaction score (PROM-HISS): Development, reliability and construct validity.

AIM: Haemorrhoidal disease (HD) is a frequently occurring disorder with a significant negative impact on a patient's quality of life. Here, we describe the development and validation of the Dutch patient reported outcome measure-haemorrhoidal impact and satisfaction score (PROM-HISS). METHODS: The development of the PROM-HISS followed recommended guidelines. Face and content validity, structural properties, reliability and construct validity were evaluated in a HD population. Reliability was tested by assessing the test-retest reliability, defined by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and internal consistency measured with Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and hypotheses testing. RESULTS: The PROM-HISS consists of three domains: (1) HD symptoms (blood loss; pain; prolapse; soiling; itching), (2) impact of symptoms on daily activities, and (3) satisfaction with treatment. The PROM-HISS showed good face and content validity. The PROM-HISS was completed by 102 patients (65% male), with a mean age of 58 years (23-81 years). The ICCs of the different items in the domain HD symptoms ranged between 0.56 and 0.79 and were interpreted as good. The Cronbach's alpha value was 0.80 and considered satisfactory. The CFA provided further evidence for construct validity with a good model fit. A high score on the symptoms of HD correlated with a high impact of HD on daily activities (Pearson's r = 0.632, p < 0.01) and a low degree of satisfaction (Pearson's r = 0.378, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The PROM-HISS is a reliable and valid instrument to evaluate symptoms of HD, impact on daily activities and satisfaction with treatment.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Used for Assessing Breast Sensation after Mastectomy: Not Fit for Purpose.

AIMS: The aims of this review were (i) to evaluate whether patient-reported outcome measures used in clinical studies for assessing sensation after mastectomy and breast reconstruction are suitable for this purpose, and (ii) to explore whether any measures used for assessing sensation after non-oncologic breast surgery are worth modifying for use in post-mastectomy patients. METHODS: PRISMA guidelines were followed (PROSPERO number CRD42020178066). We searched six databases for studies of oncologic (i.e., therapeutic, prophylactic, and reconstructive) and non-oncologic breast surgery (e.g., breast reduction) in which sensation was assessed with a patient-reported outcome measure. From the selected studies, we extracted eligible measures, evaluated their fitness for purpose, and summarized the content of sensation-specific items. RESULTS: Of 6728 articles identified, we selected 135 studies that used 124 eligible patient-reported outcome measures. For 97% of these measures, details regarding development and measurement properties were unavailable. Four (3%) validated measures-the Sensory Disturbances subscale of the Breast Cancer Sequelae Cause Scales, the Discomfort subscale of the Breast Sensation Assessment Scale (BSAS), Didier et al.'s questionnaire for "Assessment of the patients' satisfaction with cosmetic results, physical and emotional impact of mastectomy", and the Breast Specific Pain subscale of the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcomes Scale (BCTOS)-each contain at least one item pertaining to breast sensation, but target different concepts of interest. In total, the measures feature 215 sensation-specific items, most of which concern symptom severity (97%) as opposed to impact on daily functioning (3%). CONCLUSION: Patient-reported outcome measures used in clinical studies for assessing sensation after mastectomy and breast reconstruction are unsuitable for this purpose: they are either non-validated or non-specific. We failed to identify any measures for use in non-oncologic breast surgery populations worth modifying. To collect meaningful, patient-relevant data regarding sensation after mastectomy, it is pertinent that future clinical trials adopt psychometrically robust, specific patient-reported outcome measures.

Corrigendum to: Personalized teleprehabilitation in elective cardiac surgery: a study protocol of the Digital Cardiac Counselling randomized controlled trial.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1093/ehjdh/ztab041.].

Making Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Haemorrhoidal Disease in Clinical Practice: A Perspective.

Haemorrhoidal disease (HD) affects millions of people around the world and for most it is a recurring problem. Increasingly, clinicians broaden their focus on the patient's experiences with haemorrhoidal symptoms, including their impact on daily life. The patient's experience can be assessed using a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). A PROM facilitates a deeper understanding of the disease-burden and allows a clinician to obtain information directly from the patients about their experiences with the ailment. Over the last years, PROMs have shown their additional role to traditional outcomes for several diseases and have earned their place in the daily consultation room. In order to improve and personalize the treatment of HD, we endorse the use of validated PROMs in clinical care.

Burden of disease experienced by patients following a watch-and-wait policy for locally advanced rectal cancer: A qualitative study.

AIM: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used in routine cancer care to evaluate treatment and monitor symptoms, function and other aspects of quality of life (QoL). There is no suitable PROM for rectal cancer patients following a watch-and-wait (W&W) programme. Insight into patient experiences with this programme is an essential step in the development of a PROM. The aim of this qualitative study was to provide insights into the most important functional outcomes and QoL features experienced by patients during our W&W programme. METHOD: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who are enrolled in the W&W programme in the Netherlands were interviewed by telephone using a semistructured interview guide. All interviews were digitally audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded. A thematic approach was used to analyse the data and identify themes and subthemes of importance to patients. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were interviewed (78% male, mean age 68 years, range 52-83 years). Physical complaints after treatment were present, most notably gastrointestinal problems, neuropathy and fatigue. Furthermore, patients were anxious about a possible recurrence, had a fear of surgery or a stoma, or were experiencing a general feeling of apprehension in daily life. Many patients had different coping mechanisms, such as acceptance, and there were few limitations in daily life. CONCLUSION: We identified important functional outcomes, such as gastrointestinal complaints, fatigue and neuropathy, in patients who were enrolled in this W&W programme. Furthermore, an emotional burden and unmet needs were reported by these patients. These findings can be used to improve clinical practice and inform the development of a PROM.

Personalized teleprehabilitation in elective cardiac surgery: a study protocol of the Digital Cardiac Counselling randomized controlled trial.

Aims: Previous research has shown the possibility to use the pre-operative period to improve a patient's tolerance for surgery. However, there is limited experience with prehabilitation in cardiac surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of a comprehensive personalized teleprehabilitation programme on major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgery. Secondary outcomes are post-operative complications, cardiovascular risk factors, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Methods and results: In this single-centre randomized controlled trial, patients are eligible for inclusion when they are ≥18 years of age and cardiac surgery is scheduled at least 8 weeks from informed consent. Participants will be randomized to the teleprehabilitation group or the control group. After a digital baseline screening for perioperative risk factors, patients in the intervention arm can pre-operatively be referred to one or more of the prehabilitation modules (functional exercise training, inspiratory muscle training, psychological support, nutritional support, and/or smoking cessation). The programme is targeted at a duration of at least 6 weeks. It is executed by a multidisciplinary team using (video)calls and supported by a custom-made digital platform. During the pre-operative period, the platform is also used to inform patients about their upcoming surgery and for telemonitoring. Conclusion: Reducing perioperative risk factors might result in a reduction of MACE, post-operative complications, length of stay, and cardiovascular risk factors, as well as improved quality of life. Cost-effectiveness will be evaluated.

Patient outcomes, patient experiences and process indicators associated with the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in cancer care: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: In current cancer care, there is a growing debate about the value of using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in daily clinical follow-up. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to assess the evidence of the effectiveness of the routine use of PROMs in daily cancer care in terms of patient outcomes, patient experiences and process indicators and to identify the effect of giving feedback about PROM findings to patients and/or health care professionals (HCPs). METHODS: A systematic search was performed. Studies were eligible for inclusion when they (1) used a PROM as an intervention, with or without feedback to patients and/or HCPs, compared with not using a PROM, and (2) used a PROM as an intervention with feedback to patients and/or HCPs, compared with using a PROM without giving feedback to patients and/or HCPs. RESULTS: After screening of 8341 references, 22 original studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies found a positive effect on survival, symptoms, HRQoL and patient satisfaction. In general, using feedback to patient and/or HCPs about the PROM results led to better symptom control, HRQoL, patient satisfaction and patient-doctor communication. The majority of included studies had insufficient power to detect significant differences in the outcomes assessed. CONCLUSION: This review shows that predominantly positive findings were found in the use of a PROM in daily cancer care. Additionally, more positive effects were seen when feedback is provided to patient and/or health care professionals, and it is thus highly recommended that this is always done.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of rubber band ligation versus sutured mucopexy versus haemorrhoidectomy in patients with recurrent haemorrhoidal disease (Napoleon trial): Study protocol for a multicentre randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no consensus regarding the best treatment option in recurrent haemorrhoidal disease (HD), due to a lack of solid evidence. The Napoleon trial aims to provide high-level evidence on the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of repeat rubber band ligation (RBL) versus sutured mucopexy versus haemorrhoidectomy in patients with recurrent HD. METHODS: This is a multicentre randomized controlled trial. Patients with recurrent HD grade II and III, ≥18 years of age and who had at least two RBL treatments in the last three years are eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria include previous rectal or anal surgery, rectal radiation, pre-existing sphincter injury or otherwise pathologies of the colon and rectum, pregnancy, presence of hypercoagulability disorders, and medically unfit for surgery (ASA > III). Between June 2020 and May 2022, 558 patients will be randomized to receive either: (1) RBL, (2) sutured mucopexy, or (3) haemorrhoidectomy. The primary outcomes are recurrence after 52 weeks and patient-reported symptoms measured by the PROM-HISS. Secondary outcomes are impact on daily life, treatment satisfaction, early and late complication rates, health-related quality of life, costs and cost-effectiveness, and budget impact. Cost-effectiveness will be expressed in societal costs per Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) (based on EQ-5D-5L), and healthcare costs per recurrence avoided. DISCUSSION: The best treatment option for recurrent HD remains unknown. The comparison of three generally accepted treatment strategies in a randomized controlled trial will provide high-level evidence on the most (cost-) effective treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04101773.

Heterogeneous outcome reporting in adult slow-transit constipation studies: Systematic review towards a core outcome set.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Standardizing evaluative outcomes and their assessment facilitates comparisons between clinical studies and provides a basis for comparing direct effects of different treatment options. The aim of this study was to systematically review types of outcomes and measurement instruments used in studies regarding treatment options for slow-transit constipation (STC) in adults. METHODS: In this systematic review of the literature, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO from inception through February 2018, for papers assessing any STC treatment in adult patients. Outcomes were systematically extracted and categorized in domains using the conceptual framework of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology filter 2.0. Outcome reporting was stratified by decade of publication, intervention, and study type. RESULTS: Forty-seven studies were included in this systematic review. Fifty-nine different types of outcomes were identified. The outcomes were structured in three core areas and 18 domains. The most commonly reported domains were defecation functions (94%), gastrointestinal transit (53%), and health-care service use (51%). The most frequently reported outcomes were defecation frequency (83%), health-related quality of life (43%), and adverse events and complications (43%). In 62% of the studies, no primary outcome was defined, whereas in two studies, more than one primary outcomes were selected. A wide diversity of measurement instruments was used to assess the reported outcomes. CONCLUSION: Outcomes reported in studies on STC in adults are heterogeneous. A lack of standardization complicates comparisons between studies. Developing a core outcome set for STC in adults could contribute to standardization of outcome reporting in (future) studies.