Patient and healthcare practitioner evaluation of patient-reported outcomes in bariatric surgery – a modified Delphi study

Abstract

Background Patient-reported outcomes are an important emerging metric increasingly utilised in clinical, research and registry settings. These outcomes, while vital, are underutilised and require refinement for the specific patient population of those undergoing bariatric surgery. This study aimed to investigate and compare how pre-surgical patients, post-surgical patients, and healthcare practitioners evaluate patient-reported outcomes of bariatric surgery to identify outcomes that are considered most important. Methods A modified Delphi survey was distributed to patients pre- and post-surgery, and to a variety of healthcare practitioners involved in bariatric care. Across two rounds, participants were asked to rate a variety of physical and psychosocial outcomes of bariatric surgery from 0 (Not Important) to 10 (Extremely Important). Outcomes rated 8–10 by at least 70% of participants were considered highly important (prioritised). The highest-rated outcomes were compared between the three groups as well as between medical and allied health practitioner subgroups. Results 20 pre-surgical patients, 95 post-surgical patients, and 28 healthcare practitioners completed both rounds of the questionnaire. There were 58 outcomes prioritised, with 21 outcomes (out of 90, 23.3%) prioritised by all three groups, 13 (14.4%) by two groups, and 24 (26.7%) prioritised by a single group or subgroup. Unanimously prioritised outcomes included ‘Co-morbidities’, ‘General Physical Health’, ‘Overall Quality of Life’ and ‘Overall Mental Health’. Discordant outcomes included ‘Fear of Weight Regain’, ‘Suicidal Thoughts’, ‘Addictive Behaviours’, and ‘Experience of Stigma or Discrimination’. Conclusion While there was considerable agreement between stakeholder groups on many outcomes, there remain several outcomes with discordant importance valuations that must be considered. In particular, healthcare practitioners prioritised 20 outcomes that were not prioritised by patients, emphasising the range of priorities across stakeholder groups. Future work will consider these priorities to ensure resulting measures encompass all important outcomes and are beneficial and valid for end users.