Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache · 2021
Are PROMs passing the message? A reflection with real-life migraine patients.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Gil-Gouveia Raquel, Oliveira António Gouveia
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Several patient-reported outcome measures are available to monitor headache impact, but are those reliable in real-life clinical practice?
METHODS: Two identical patient-reported outcome measures (HALT-90 and MIDAS) were applied simultaneously in each clinical visit to a series of patients treated with monoclonal antibodies for migraine and intra-individual agreement was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficients.
RESULTS: Our sample included 92 patients, 92.4% females, 45 years old on average. Moderate (0.50 to 0.75) and even poor (<0.50) ICC were observed in all but the first item of these patient-reported outcome measures in at least one evaluation. Over time, missing data were more frequent and no learning effect was detected.
DISCUSSION: We observed intra-personal variation in reliability when answering patient-reported outcome measures, persisting in repeated applications, and a decrease in the motivation to respond, which should alert clinicians for these additional challenges in real-life clinical practice.
METHODS: Two identical patient-reported outcome measures (HALT-90 and MIDAS) were applied simultaneously in each clinical visit to a series of patients treated with monoclonal antibodies for migraine and intra-individual agreement was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficients.
RESULTS: Our sample included 92 patients, 92.4% females, 45 years old on average. Moderate (0.50 to 0.75) and even poor (<0.50) ICC were observed in all but the first item of these patient-reported outcome measures in at least one evaluation. Over time, missing data were more frequent and no learning effect was detected.
DISCUSSION: We observed intra-personal variation in reliability when answering patient-reported outcome measures, persisting in repeated applications, and a decrease in the motivation to respond, which should alert clinicians for these additional challenges in real-life clinical practice.