Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Patient-reported outcome measures to evaluate postoperative quality of life in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery: a systematic review

  • Review
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To appraise the measurement properties of generic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) measuring postoperative quality of life in adults undergoing elective abdominal surgery.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of PROMs administered after elective abdominal surgery. We systematically searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature database, and the Cochrane Library from earliest available dates to July 24, 2021, using relevant search terms. Articles were included if they reported assessment of measurement properties of a generic PROM/s measuring postoperative quality of life in adults who had undergone elective abdominal surgery. We used the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist to assess methodological quality. We synthesized the data and used the COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations criteria to rate the certainty of evidence.

Results

Of 12,121 identified articles, nine articles assessing five PROMs (SF-6D, EQ-5D, SF-36, SF-12, PROMIS-10) met inclusion criteria. Measurement properties assessed included internal consistency (n = 2), construct validity (n = 5), and responsiveness (n = 8). Two PROMs had high quality evidence for a single measurement property each. The SF-6D demonstrated high quality evidence for responsiveness and the EQ-5D had high quality evidence for construct validity.

Conclusion

There is insufficient evidence to support the choice of a specific generic PROM to evaluate quality of life following elective abdominal surgery. Clinicians and researchers should be aware of the current limitations in knowledge of the measurement properties of available PROMs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shrime, M. G., Bickler, S. W., Alkire, B. C., & Mock, C. (2015). Global burden of surgical disease: An estimation from the provider perspective. The Lancet Global Health, 3, S8–S9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Weiser, T. G., Haynes, A. B., Molina, G., Lipsitz, S. R., Esquivel, M. M., Uribe-Leitz, T., Fu, R., Azad, T., Chao, T. E., & Berry, W. R. (2015). Estimate of the global volume of surgery in 2012: An assessment supporting improved health outcomes. The Lancet, 385, S11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Prin, M., Guglielminotti, J., Mtalimanja, O., Li, G., & Charles, A. (2018). Emergency-to-elective surgery ratio: A global indicator of access to surgical care. World Journal of Surgery, 42(7), 1971–1980.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. International Surgical Outcomes Study group. (2016). Global patient outcomes after elective surgery: Prospective cohort study in 27 low-, middle- and high-income countries. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 117(5), 601–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Peden, C. J., & Grocott, M. P. (2014). National Research Strategies: What outcomes are important in peri-operative elderly care? Anaesthesia, 69(Suppl 1), 61–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Myles, P. S., Boney, O., Botti, M., Cyna, A. M., Gan, T. J., Jensen, M. P., Kehlet, H., Kurz, A., De Oliveira, G. S., Jr., Peyton, P., Sessler, D. I., Tramer, M. R., Wu, C. L., St, E. P. C. G., Myles, P., Grocott, M., Biccard, B., Blazeby, J., Boney, O., Chan, M., et al. (2018). Systematic review and consensus definitions for the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative: Patient comfort. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 120(4), 705–711.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Moonesinghe, S. R., Jackson, A. I. R., Boney, O., Stevenson, N., Chan, M. T. V., Cook, T. M., Lane-Fall, M., Kalkman, C., Neuman, M. D., Nilsson, U., Shulman, M., Myles, P. S., et al. (2019). Systematic review and consensus definitions for the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine initiative: Patient-centred outcomes. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 123(5), 664–670.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rajabiyazdi, F., Alam, R., Pal, A., Montanez, J., Law, S., Pecorelli, N., Watanabe, Y., Chiavegato, L. D., Falconi, M., Hirano, S., Mayo, N. E., Lee, L., Feldman, L. S., & Fiore, J. F., Jr. (2021). Understanding the meaning of recovery to patients undergoing abdominal surgery. JAMA Surgery., 156, 758.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration; 2009.

  10. Black, N. (2013). Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. British Medical Journal, 346, f167.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fiore, J. F., Jr., Figueiredo, S., Balvardi, S., Lee, L., Nauche, B., Landry, T., Mayo, N. E., & Feldman, L. S. (2018). How do we value postoperative recovery?: A systematic review of the measurement properties of patient-reported outcomes after abdominal surgery. Annals of Surgery, 267(4), 656–669.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Higginson, I. J., & Carr, A. J. (2001). Using quality of life measures in the clinical setting. British Medical Journal, 322(7297), 1297–1300.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. WHOQOL Group. (1995). The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): Position paper from the World Health Organization. Social Science & Medicine, 41(10), 1403–1409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. World Health Organization. (1947). The constitution of the world health organization. WHO Chronicle, 1, 29.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Urbach, D. R. (2005). Measuring quality of life after surgery. Surgical Innovation, 12(2), 161–165.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Prinsen, C. A. C., Mokkink, L. B., Bouter, L. M., Alonso, J., Patrick, D. L., de Vet, H. C. W., & Terwee, C. B. (2018). COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Quality of Life Research, 27(5), 1147–1157.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264–269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Terwee, C. B., Jansma, E. P., Riphagen, I., & de Vet, H. C. (2009). Development of a methodological PubMed search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments. Quality of Life Research, 18(8), 1115–1123.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. PROM Group. PROM group construct and instrument type filters. Retrieved February 19, 2020 from https://cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/prom-search-filter-oxford-2010.pdf

  20. Mangione, C. M., Goldman, L., Orav, E. J., Marcantonio, E. R., Pedan, A., Ludwig, L. E., Donaldson, M. C., Sugarbaker, D. J., Poss, R., & Lee, T. H. (1997). Health-related quality of life after elective surgery: Measurement of longitudinal changes. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 12(11), 686–697.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Antonescu, I., Carli, F., Mayo, N. E., & Feldman, L. S. (2014). Validation of the SF-36 as a measure of postoperative recovery after colorectal surgery. Surgical Endoscopy, 28(11), 3168–3178.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Terwee, C. B., Prinsen, C. A. C., Chiarotto, A., Westerman, M. J., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L. M., de Vet, H. C. W., & Mokkink, L. B. (2018). COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: A Delphi study. Quality of Life Research, 27(5), 1159–1170.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. McHorney, C. A., Ware, J. E., Jr., & Raczek, A. E. (1993). The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Medical Care, 31, 247–263.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Cohen Ventura, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. ProQuest. Taylor & Francis Group.

  25. Bowyer, A., & Royse, C. F. (2016). Postoperative recovery and outcomes: What are we measuring and for whom? Anaesthesia, 71, 72–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee, L., Tran, T., Mayo, N. E., Carli, F., & Feldman, L. S. (2014). What does it really mean to “recover” from an operation? Surgery, 155(2), 211–216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lee, L., Mata, J., Augustin, B. R., Carli, F., Morin, N., Latimer, E., & Feldman, L. S. (2014). A comparison of the validity of two indirect utility instruments as measures of postoperative recovery. The Journal of Surgical Research, 190(1), 79–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee, L., Elfassy, N., Li, C., Latimer, E., Liberman, A. S., Charlebois, P., Stein, B., Carli, F., Fried, G. M., & Feldman, L. S. (2013). Valuing postoperative recovery: Validation of the SF-6D health-state utility. The Journal of Surgical Research, 184(1), 108–114.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Harvie, H. S., Honeycutt, A. A., Neuwahl, S. J., Barber, M. D., Richter, H. E., Visco, A. G., Sung, V. W., Shepherd, J. P., Rogers, R. G., Jakus-Waldman, S., & Mazloomdoost, D. (2019). Responsiveness and minimally important difference of SF-6D and EQ-5D utility scores for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 220(3), 265.e261-265.e211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hörchner, R., & Tuinebreijer, W. (1999). Improvement of physical functioning of morbidly obese patients who have undergone a Lap-Band operation: One-year study. Obesity Surgery, 9(4), 399–402.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Palsson, S. H., Rasmussen, I., Lundstrom, P., Osterberg, J., & Sandblom, G. (2011). Registration of health-related quality of life in a cohort of patients undergoing cholecystectomy. ISRN Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.5402/2011/507389

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Frick, A. C., Ridgeway, B., Ellerkmann, M., Karram, M. M., Paraiso, M. F., Walters, M. D., & Barber, M. D. (2010). Comparison of responsiveness of validated outcome measures after surgery for stress urinary incontinence. Journal of Urology, 184(5), 2013–2017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bingener, J., Sloan, J. A., Seisler, D. K., McConico, A. L., Skaran, P. E., Farley, D. R., & Truty, M. J. (2015). PROMIS for laparoscopy. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 19(5), 917–926.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. COSMIN. Quality of PROM development. Retrieved October 27, 2020 from https://www.cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/PROM-Development-ratings-for-COSMIN-website-v1.pdf

  35. Chiarotto, A., Terwee, C. B., Kamper, S. J., Boers, M., & Ostelo, R. W. (2018). Evidence on the measurement properties of health-related quality of life instruments is largely missing in patients with low back pain: A systematic review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 102, 23–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21(2), 271–292.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Gagnier, J. J. (2017). Patient reported outcomes in orthopaedics. Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 35(10), 2098–2108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ioannidis, J. P., Greenland, S., Hlatky, M. A., Khoury, M. J., Macleod, M. R., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Tibshirani, R. (2014). Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. The Lancet, 383(9912), 166–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Strickland, L. H., Hamilton, T. W., Jenkinson, C. C., Murray, D. W., & Pandit, H. G. (2016). Patient-reported outcome measure for early postoperative recovery following lower limb arthroplasty: A systematic review. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 31(12), 2933–2940.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Herrera, F. J., Wong, J., & Chung, F. (2007). A systematic review of postoperative recovery outcomes measurements after ambulatory surgery. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 105(1), 63–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Pusic, A. L., Chen, C. M., Cano, S., Klassen, A., McCarthy, C., Collins, E. D., & Cordeiro, P. G. (2007). Measuring quality of life in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery: A systematic review of patient-reported outcomes instruments. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 120(4), 823–829.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Protopapa, E., van der Meulen, J., Moore, C. M., & Smith, S. C. (2017). Patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires for men who have radical surgery for prostate cancer: A conceptual review of existing instruments. BJU International, 120(4), 468–481.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kleif, J., Waage, J., Christensen, K. B., & Gögenur, I. (2018). Systematic review of the QoR-15 score, a patient: Reported outcome measure measuring quality of recovery after surgery and anaesthesia. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 120(1), 28–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Schifferdecker, K. E., Yount, S. E., Kaiser, K., Adachi-Mejia, A., Cella, D., Carluzzo, K. L., Eisenstein, A., Kallen, M. A., Greene, G. J., Eton, D. T., & Fisher, E. S. (2018). A method to create a standardized generic and condition-specific patient-reported outcome measure for patient care and healthcare improvement. Quality of Life Research, 27(2), 367–378.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Group, & T. E. (1990). EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy, 16(3), 199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Ware, J. E., Jr., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1996). A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care, 34(3), 220–233.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Revicki, D. A., Spritzer, K. L., & Cella, D. (2009). Development of physical and mental health summary scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items. Quality of Life Research, 18(7), 873–880.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Margot Lodge is supported by an Australian Government RTP (Research Training Program) scholarship. Darshini Ayton is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Investigator Emerging Leader Fellowship APP1195357. Velandai Srikanth is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Practitioner Fellowship 1137837.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Peninsula Clinical School, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

    Margot E. Lodge, Chris Moran, Nadine E. Andrew & Velandai K. Srikanth

  2. Health of Older People, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Margot E. Lodge & Chris Moran

  3. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Chris Moran, Hui-Ching Lee & Velandai K. Srikanth

  4. Department of Anaesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Adam D. J. Sutton

  5. Department of Anaesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Adam D. J. Sutton

  6. Department of Ageing and Health, Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK

    Jugdeep K. Dhesi

  7. School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, Kings College London, London, UK

    Jugdeep K. Dhesi

  8. Health and Social Care Unit, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

    Darshini R. Ayton

  9. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery, Peninsula Clinical School, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

    David J. Hunter-Smith

  10. Peninsula Clinical School, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

    David A. Snowdon

  11. Academic Unit, Peninsula Health, Melbourne, Australia

    David A. Snowdon

Authors
  1. Margot E. Lodge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chris Moran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adam D. J. Sutton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hui-Ching Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jugdeep K. Dhesi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nadine E. Andrew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Darshini R. Ayton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. David J. Hunter-Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Velandai K. Srikanth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. David A. Snowdon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors of this manuscript have contributed as follows: MEL: Led conception and design process, acquisition of data, and analysis and interpretation of data. Completed first draft of manuscript, and co-led ongoing revisions as first author. Gave final approval of submitted version. CM: Contributed to conception and design process, acquisition of data, and analysis of data. Co-led interpretation of data. Contributed to planning/structure of first draft, and co-led ongoing revisions. Gave final approval of submitted version. ADJS: Contributed to acquisition of data. Contributed to interpretation of data. Contributed to revisions of manuscript. Gave final approval of submitted version. HCL: Contributed to acquisition of data. Contributed to interpretation of data. Contributed to revisions of manuscript. Gave final approval of submitted version. JKD: Contributed to interpretation of data. Contributed to revisions of manuscript. Gave final approval of submitted version. NEA: Contributed to conception. Contributed to interpretation of data. Contributed to revisions of manuscript. Gave final approval of submitted version. DRA: Contributed to interpretation of data. Contributed to revisions of manuscript. Gave final approval of submitted version. DJH: Contributed to interpretation of data. Contributed to revisions of manuscript. Gave final approval of submitted version. VKS: Contributed to interpretation of data. Contributed to revisions of manuscript. Gave final approval of submitted version. DAS: Contributed to conception and design process, and acquisition of data. Co-led analysis and interpretation of data. Contributed to planning/structure of first draft, and co-led ongoing revisions. Gave final approval of submitted version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris Moran.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 486 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lodge, M.E., Moran, C., Sutton, A.D.J. et al. Patient-reported outcome measures to evaluate postoperative quality of life in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery: a systematic review. Qual Life Res 31, 2267–2279 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03071-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03071-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation