Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
Health-related quality of life in patients with extremity bone sarcoma after surgical treatment: a systematic review.
Систематический обзорСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fernando-Canavan Liam, Abraham Patrick, Devlin Nancy, Tran-Duy An
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We conducted a systematic review of studies reporting on measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), with a special focus on the use of the preference-weighted instruments, in patients with extremity bone sarcoma treated with limb-salvage surgery or amputation.
METHODS: We searched MedLine, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science for English-language studies reporting on HRQoL of patients with bone sarcoma from inception to 28 August 2023. All records found were independently reviewed by two reviewers. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the CONSORT 2010 checklist to assess the quality of the cohort and randomised studies, respectively.
RESULTS: The search identified 1225 records, of which 16 studies were included for data extraction. Only one study used a preference-weighted instrument for measuring HRQoL in a small sample of patients (n = 28). Ten studies used the generic SF-36 questionnaire, but no preference-weighted HRQoL based on SF-6D was derived from the SF-36 scores. Most studies comparing HRQoL between amputation and limb-salvage surgery reported no significant differences. Twelve cohort studies scored six or more out of nine points based on the NOS. The only randomised study scored 54% on the CONSORT 2010 checklist.
CONCLUSIONS: The approaches used to measure HRQoL were inconsistent and outcome scores varied substantially. Only one study used preference-weighted instruments for HRQoL measurement. Future research into the surgical treatment of extremity bone sarcoma should consider the use of preference-weighted instruments to measure HRQoL, which will therefore enable economic evaluation for the growing orthopaedic armamentarium of novel surgical interventions.
REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered with the PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42021282380).
METHODS: We searched MedLine, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science for English-language studies reporting on HRQoL of patients with bone sarcoma from inception to 28 August 2023. All records found were independently reviewed by two reviewers. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the CONSORT 2010 checklist to assess the quality of the cohort and randomised studies, respectively.
RESULTS: The search identified 1225 records, of which 16 studies were included for data extraction. Only one study used a preference-weighted instrument for measuring HRQoL in a small sample of patients (n = 28). Ten studies used the generic SF-36 questionnaire, but no preference-weighted HRQoL based on SF-6D was derived from the SF-36 scores. Most studies comparing HRQoL between amputation and limb-salvage surgery reported no significant differences. Twelve cohort studies scored six or more out of nine points based on the NOS. The only randomised study scored 54% on the CONSORT 2010 checklist.
CONCLUSIONS: The approaches used to measure HRQoL were inconsistent and outcome scores varied substantially. Only one study used preference-weighted instruments for HRQoL measurement. Future research into the surgical treatment of extremity bone sarcoma should consider the use of preference-weighted instruments to measure HRQoL, which will therefore enable economic evaluation for the growing orthopaedic armamentarium of novel surgical interventions.
REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered with the PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42021282380).