• N J Preston, N Wilson, N J Wood, J Brine, J Ferreira, and S G Brearley.
• Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
• BJOG. 2015 Apr 1; 122 (5): 615-22.

BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to assess the impact of health care on a patient's health. Within the gynaecological oncology setting, multiple PROMs have been adopted but no assessment has been made in terms of their psychometric qualities and robustness.ObjectivesTo undertake a systematic review to identify the most psychometrically robust and appropriate PROM used in the gynaecological oncology setting.Search StrategyA search of the bibliographic database of the Oxford PROM group, plus nine additional databases, was carried out along with citation-tracking and hand searches.Selection CriteriaStudies examining the psychometric properties of outcome measures tested in gynaecological cancer populations were selected by three blinded reviewers.Data Collection And AnalysisStudies were independently assessed and data extracted. Analysis included an appraisal of the psychometric properties and functionality of the included PROMs to guide recommendations.Main ResultsEighteen PROMs tested in gynaecological oncology settings were identified. These were categorised into seven areas of focus, and the most psychometrically robust tools were identified: (1) generic (no recommendation); (2) general cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G); (3) pelvic cancer (QUEST GY); (4) ovarian cancer (EORTC QLQ-OV28); (5) cervical cancer (EORTC QLQ-CX24); (6) endometrial cancer (EORTC QLQ-EN 24); and (7) vulval cancer (FACT-V).Author's ConclusionsSeven PROMs were recommended for use in six gynaecological populations. No single tool was identified that had been tested in all disease groups. Some showed promise, but a lack of conceptual clarity about the core outcomes and the rationale for use will require further testing using well-constructed studies.© 2015 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

34 keywords...

hide…