Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021
Diabetic foot disease: a systematic literature review of patient-reported outcome measures.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Pérez-Panero Alberto J, Ruiz-Muñoz María, Fernández-Torres Raúl, Formosa Cynthia, Gatt Alfred, Gónzalez-Sánchez Manuel
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Diabetic foot disease is one of the most serious and expensive complications of diabetes. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) analyse patients' perception of their disability, functionality and health. The goal of this work was to conduct a systematic review regarding the specific PROMs related to the evaluation of diabetic foot disease and to extract and analyse the values of their measurement properties.
METHODS: Electronic databases included were PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, PEDro, Cochrane, SciELO and EMBASE. The search terms used were foot, diabet*, diabetic foot, questionnaire, patient-reported outcome, self-care, valid*, reliabil*. Studies whose did not satisfy the Critical Appraisals Skills Programme (CASP) Diagnostic Study Checklist were excluded. The measurement properties extracted were: Internal Consistency, Test-retest, Inter-rater and Intra-rater, Standard Error of Measurement, Minimum Detectable Measurement Difference, Content Validity, Construct Validity, Criterion Validity and Responsiveness.
RESULTS: The PROMs selected for this review were 12 questionnaires. The Diabetic foot self-care questionnaire (DFSQ-UMA) and the Questionnaire for Diabetes Related Foot Disease (Q-DFD) were the PROMs that showed the highest number of completed measurement properties.
CONCLUSION: According to the results, it is relevant to create specific questionnaires for the evaluation of diabetic foot disease. It seems appropriate to use both DFSQ-UMA and Q-DFD when assessing patients with diabetic foot disease.
METHODS: Electronic databases included were PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, PEDro, Cochrane, SciELO and EMBASE. The search terms used were foot, diabet*, diabetic foot, questionnaire, patient-reported outcome, self-care, valid*, reliabil*. Studies whose did not satisfy the Critical Appraisals Skills Programme (CASP) Diagnostic Study Checklist were excluded. The measurement properties extracted were: Internal Consistency, Test-retest, Inter-rater and Intra-rater, Standard Error of Measurement, Minimum Detectable Measurement Difference, Content Validity, Construct Validity, Criterion Validity and Responsiveness.
RESULTS: The PROMs selected for this review were 12 questionnaires. The Diabetic foot self-care questionnaire (DFSQ-UMA) and the Questionnaire for Diabetes Related Foot Disease (Q-DFD) were the PROMs that showed the highest number of completed measurement properties.
CONCLUSION: According to the results, it is relevant to create specific questionnaires for the evaluation of diabetic foot disease. It seems appropriate to use both DFSQ-UMA and Q-DFD when assessing patients with diabetic foot disease.