Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorVollert, J
dc.contributor.authorSegelcke, D
dc.contributor.authorWeinmann, C
dc.contributor.authorSchnabel, K
dc.contributor.authorFuchtmann, F
dc.contributor.authorRosenberger, DC
dc.contributor.authorKomann, M
dc.contributor.authorMaessen, T
dc.contributor.authorSauer, L
dc.contributor.authorKalso, E
dc.contributor.authorFletcher, D
dc.contributor.authorLavand'homme, P
dc.contributor.authorKaiser, U
dc.contributor.authorLiedgens, H
dc.contributor.authorMeissner, W
dc.contributor.authorPogatzki-Zahn, EM
dc.date.accessioned2023-12-18T14:13:28Z
dc.date.issued2023-11-27
dc.date.updated2023-12-18T13:23:22Z
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Postsurgical outcome measures are crucial to define the efficacy of perioperative pain management; however, it is unclear which are most appropriate. We conducted a prospective study aiming to assess sensitivity-to-change of patient-reported outcome measures assessing the core outcome set of domains pain intensity (at rest/during activity), physical function, adverse events, and self-efficacy. METHODS: Patient-reported outcome measures were assessed preoperatively, on day 1 (d1), d3, and d7 after four surgical procedures (total knee replacement, breast surgery, endometriosis-related surgery, and sternotomy). Primary outcomes were sensitivity-to-change of patient-reported outcome measures analysed by correlating their changes (d1-d3) with patients' global impression of change and patients' specific impression of change items as anchor criteria. Secondary outcomes included identification of baseline and patient characteristic variables explaining variance in change for each of the scales and descriptive analysis of various patient-reported outcome measures from different domains and after different surgeries. RESULTS: Of 3322 patients included (18 hospitals, 10 countries), data from 2661 patients were analysed. All patient-reported outcome measures improved on average over time; the median calculated sensitivity-to-change for all patient-reported outcome measures (overall surgeries) was 0.22 (range: 0.07-0.31, scale: 0-10); all changes were independent of baseline data or patient characteristics and similar between different procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Pain-related patient-reported outcome measures have low to moderate sensitivity-to-change; those showing higher sensitivity-to-change from the same domain should be considered for inclusion in a core outcome set of patient-reported outcome measures to assess the effectiveness and efficacy of perioperative pain management.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipEuropean Union Horizon 2020en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipEFPIA Companiesen_GB
dc.format.extentS0007-0912(23)00575-5-
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic
dc.identifier.citationPublished online 27 November 2023en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2023.10.020
dc.identifier.grantnumber777500en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/134817
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0003-0733-5201 (Vollert, Jan)
dc.identifierScopusID: 55985922500 (Vollert, Jan)
dc.identifierResearcherID: AAJ-7461-2020 (Vollert, Jan)
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherElsevieren_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38016907en_GB
dc.rights© 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of British Journal of Anaesthesia. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).en_GB
dc.subjectacute painen_GB
dc.subjectcore outcome seten_GB
dc.subjectpain assessmenten_GB
dc.subjectpsychometric propertiesen_GB
dc.subjectsensitivity-to-changeen_GB
dc.subjectsurgeryen_GB
dc.titleResponsiveness of multiple patient-reported outcome measures for acute postsurgical pain: primary results from the international multi-centre PROMPT NIT-1 studyen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2023-12-18T14:13:28Z
dc.identifier.issn0007-0912
exeter.place-of-publicationEngland
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Elsevier via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.identifier.eissn1471-6771
dc.identifier.journalBritish Journal of Anaesthesiaen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofBr J Anaesth
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2023-10-26
dc.rights.licenseCC BY-NC-ND
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2023-11-27
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2023-12-18T14:11:45Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2023-12-18T14:25:11Z
refterms.panelAen_GB
refterms.dateFirstOnline2023-11-27


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of British Journal of Anaesthesia. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of British Journal of Anaesthesia. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).