Patient-reported physical functioning and quality of life after pelvic ring injury: A systematic review of the literature.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
19
02
2020
accepted:
30
04
2020
entrez:
18
7
2020
pubmed:
18
7
2020
medline:
9
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pelvic ring injuries are one of the most serious traumatic injuries with large consequences for the patients' daily life. During recent years, the importance of the patients' perception of their functioning and quality of life following injury has increasingly received attention. This systematic review reports on self-reported physical functioning and quality of life after all types of pelvic ring injuries. The online databases MEDLINE-PubMed and Ovid-EMBASE were searched for studies published between 2008 and 2019 to identify published evidence of patient-reported physical functioning and quality of life after which they were assessed for their methodological quality. Of the 2577 articles, 46 were reviewed in full-text, including 3049 patients. Most studies were heterogeneous, with small cohorts of patients, a variety of injury types, treatment methods and use of different, often non-validated, outcome measures. The overall methodological quality was moderate to poor. Nine different PROMs were used, of which the Majeed Pelvic Score (MPS), SF-36 and EQ-5D were the most widely used. Mean scores respectively ranged from 75-95 (MPS), 53-69 (SF-36, physical functioning) and 0.63-0.80 (EQ-5D). Physical functioning and quality of life following pelvic ring injuries seem fair and tend to improve during follow-up. However, differences in patient numbers, injury definition, treatment strategy, follow-up duration and type of PROMs used between studies hampers to elucidate the actual effects of pelvic ring injuries on a patient's life. Physicians and researchers should use valid and reliable patient-reported outcome instruments on large cohorts of patients with properly defined injuries to truly evaluate physical functioning and quality of life after pelvic ring injuries. PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews; registration number CRD42019129176.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Pelvic ring injuries are one of the most serious traumatic injuries with large consequences for the patients' daily life. During recent years, the importance of the patients' perception of their functioning and quality of life following injury has increasingly received attention. This systematic review reports on self-reported physical functioning and quality of life after all types of pelvic ring injuries.
METHODS
The online databases MEDLINE-PubMed and Ovid-EMBASE were searched for studies published between 2008 and 2019 to identify published evidence of patient-reported physical functioning and quality of life after which they were assessed for their methodological quality.
RESULTS
Of the 2577 articles, 46 were reviewed in full-text, including 3049 patients. Most studies were heterogeneous, with small cohorts of patients, a variety of injury types, treatment methods and use of different, often non-validated, outcome measures. The overall methodological quality was moderate to poor. Nine different PROMs were used, of which the Majeed Pelvic Score (MPS), SF-36 and EQ-5D were the most widely used. Mean scores respectively ranged from 75-95 (MPS), 53-69 (SF-36, physical functioning) and 0.63-0.80 (EQ-5D).
CONCLUSIONS
Physical functioning and quality of life following pelvic ring injuries seem fair and tend to improve during follow-up. However, differences in patient numbers, injury definition, treatment strategy, follow-up duration and type of PROMs used between studies hampers to elucidate the actual effects of pelvic ring injuries on a patient's life.
IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS
Physicians and researchers should use valid and reliable patient-reported outcome instruments on large cohorts of patients with properly defined injuries to truly evaluate physical functioning and quality of life after pelvic ring injuries.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews; registration number CRD42019129176.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32678840
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233226
pii: PONE-D-20-04766
pmc: PMC7367481
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0233226Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Clin Invest Med. 2017 Jun 26;40(3):E102
pubmed: 28653611
Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil. 2017 Mar;8(1):3-9
pubmed: 28255503
Radiology. 1986 Aug;160(2):445-51
pubmed: 3726125
Injury. 2018 Apr;49(4):812-818
pubmed: 29566985
Med Arh. 2011;65(5):278-82
pubmed: 22073851
J Orthop Surg Res. 2015 Sep 22;10:151
pubmed: 26391358
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2018 Oct;104(6):923-928
pubmed: 29913269
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2019 Apr;139(4):489-496
pubmed: 30535810
Int Orthop. 2013 Nov;37(11):2239-45
pubmed: 23995332
Qual Life Res. 2002 May;11(3):193-205
pubmed: 12074258
Injury. 2019 Mar;50(3):690-696
pubmed: 30792004
J Orthop Surg Res. 2016 May 27;11(1):62
pubmed: 27233837
Int J Med Robot. 2018 Oct;14(5):e1927
pubmed: 29920914
J Orthop Surg Res. 2019 Jan 7;14(1):7
pubmed: 30616655
Injury. 2011 Oct;42(10):1012-9
pubmed: 21232742
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2017 Jan;25(1):2309499016684322
pubmed: 28142352
Orthopedics. 2015 Nov;38(11):e976-82
pubmed: 26558677
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Apr;94(4):549-55
pubmed: 22434474
Curr Med Sci. 2018 Oct;38(5):827-833
pubmed: 30341516
J Orthop Trauma. 2014 Dec;28(12):686-93
pubmed: 25250611
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2018 Apr;44(2):171-177
pubmed: 27138008
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2019 Sep;139(9):1225-1233
pubmed: 30976900
J Orthop Trauma. 2014 Jan;28(1):23-7
pubmed: 23571293
Acta Orthop Belg. 2013 Feb;79(1):54-9
pubmed: 23547516
J Orthop Surg Res. 2017 Dec 01;12(1):185
pubmed: 29191213
J Trauma. 2010 Jul;69(1):128-36
pubmed: 20093984
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2016 Oct;42(5):645-650
pubmed: 26459473
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Jan 25;18(1):40
pubmed: 28122599
Injury. 2015 Oct;46(10):1996-8
pubmed: 26275513
Int Orthop. 2019 Feb;43(2):261-267
pubmed: 29946740
Clin Orthop Surg. 2016 Sep;8(3):243-8
pubmed: 27583105
Biomed J. 2013 Nov-Dec;36(6):289-94
pubmed: 24385071
J Orthop Trauma. 2012 May;26(5):296-301
pubmed: 22337480
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2018 Nov 15;:
pubmed: 30443777
Eur Spine J. 2016 Jun;25(6):1939-44
pubmed: 26769033
Malays Orthop J. 2015 Nov;9(3):23-27
pubmed: 28611905
Value Health. 2007 Nov-Dec;10 Suppl 2:S94-S105
pubmed: 17995479
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Nov;469(11):3209-17
pubmed: 21607750
ANZ J Surg. 2016 Sep;86(9):687-90
pubmed: 27283794
J Int Med Res. 2018 Jan;46(1):368-380
pubmed: 28661263
Br J Sports Med. 2015 Dec;49(24):1545-6
pubmed: 25807155
J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2019 Sep-Oct;10(5):896-899
pubmed: 31528064
J Invest Surg. 2019 Mar 19;:1-9
pubmed: 30885021
J Orthop Trauma. 2016 Jun;30(6):336-9
pubmed: 26655520
J Orthop Sci. 2012 Sep;17(5):580-7
pubmed: 22810807
Injury. 2008 Aug;39(8):869-74
pubmed: 18621370
Bone Joint J. 2013 Apr;95-B(4):548-53
pubmed: 23539709
Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015 Jan 15;8(1):827-35
pubmed: 25785063
Med Care. 2012 Dec;50(12):1060-70
pubmed: 22922434
J Orthop Trauma. 2019 Feb;33(2):64-70
pubmed: 30688835
Surgeon. 2013 Dec;11(6):344-51
pubmed: 23932669
J Orthop Surg Res. 2017 Jun 6;12(1):84
pubmed: 28587657
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015 Jul 25;16:167
pubmed: 26205233
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Sep;471(9):2841-5
pubmed: 23408176
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Aug;470(8):2161-72
pubmed: 22278851
J Orthop Trauma. 2017 Jan;31(1):27-30
pubmed: 27755336
Sci Rep. 2019 Feb 22;9(1):2578
pubmed: 30796253
Int Orthop. 2018 Mar;42(3):681-686
pubmed: 29238871
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2011 May;17(3):261-6
pubmed: 21935806