Changes in quality of life after elective surgery: an observational study comparing two measures

Abstract

Subjective global quality of life report does not agree well with a validated quality of life instrument, perhaps due to patient over-optimism.

How Should We Define Clinically Significant Improvement on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Test for Patients Undergoing Knee Meniscal Surgery?

“…In this study, we found the MCIDs for the VR-12 PCS and SF-12 PCS to be 6.48 and 9.28, respectively, similar to the values reported in the literature. 44 The MCID for the KOOS has previously been determined to be 8 to 10, whereas that for the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score has been found to range from 9 to 20.5 after surgical treatment of various knee pathologies. 21,[45][46][47] These findings suggest that PROMIS may be more sensitive than legacy knee instruments and offer improved resolution in detecting clinical change.…”

High-dose versus standard-dose amoxicillin/clavulanate for clinically-diagnosed acute bacterial sinusitis: A randomized clinical trial

“…The data collectors found that participants gave improvement ratings quickly and confidently. In measuring health-related quality of life, however, researchers continue to debate the relative validities of an overall judgment vs. a sum of separate judgments and of assessing improvement directly vs. inferring it from changes in assessments of current states [ 25 , 37 – 43 ]. Second, the IR HD caused a considerable increase by Day 3 in diarrhea perceived as severe—15.8% vs. 4.8% (a number-needed-to-harm of 9).…”

Responsiveness of the Brazilian versions of CPQ11‐14 and Child‐OIDP

“…The global transition judgement, utilized in this study, is generally used as the gold standard in assessing responsiveness of measures for adult respondents. There, however, are no definitive conclusions about the validity of these transition judgements, and the selection of an external indicator of changes may be a problem as it may underestimate patient responses . Subjects aged 11‐14 years, however, can respond to questions concerning their health status and its effects on their lives overall and to make judgements concerning their emotional states and relationships with others related to their health .…”

“…There, however, are no definitive conclusions about the validity of these transition judgements, 21 and the selection of an external indicator of changes may be a problem 22 as it may underestimate patient responses. 23 Subjects aged 11-14 years, however, can respond to questions concerning their health status and its effects on their lives overall and to make judgements concerning their emotional states and relationships with others related to their health. 24 It is also possible that the characteristics of the sample may have influenced our results.…”