Patient perspectives on recall period and response options in patient-reported outcome measures for chronic rhinosinusitis symptomatology: An international multi-centered study.
PROM
chronic rhinosinusitis
design
patient-reported outcome
recall
response
scale
Journal
International forum of allergy & rhinology
ISSN: 2042-6984
Titre abrégé: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101550261
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Oct 2023
03 Oct 2023
Historique:
revised:
12
09
2023
received:
20
08
2023
accepted:
18
09
2023
medline:
3
10
2023
pubmed:
3
10
2023
entrez:
3
10
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Existing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) use a variety of recall periods and response scales to assess CRS symptom burden. Global perspectives of CRS patients regarding optimal recall periods and response scales for CRS PROMs are unknown. This was a multi-center, cross-sectional study recruiting 461 CRS patients from sites across the United States, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, and Austria. Participants chose which CRS symptom recall period (1 day, 2 weeks, 1 month, >1 month) was most reflective of their current disease state and upon which to best base treatment recommendations (including surgery). Participants also chose which of six response scales (one visual analogue scale and five Likert scales ranging from four to eight items) was easiest to use, understand, and preferred. A plurality of participants (40.0%) felt their CRS symptoms' current state was best reflected by a 1-month recall period. However, most patients (56.9%) preferred treatment recommendations to be determined by symptoms experienced over a >1 month period. The four- and five-item Likert scales were the easiest to understand (26.0% and 25.4%, respectively) and use (23.4% and 26.7%, respectively). The five-item (26.4% rating it most preferred and 70.9% rating it preferred) and four-item Likert (22.3% rating it most preferred and 56.4% rating it preferred) response scales were most preferred. Future PROMs for CRS should consider assessment of symptoms over a 1-month period and use a four- or five-item Likert response scale to reflect global patient preferences. These findings also inform interpretation of current CRS PROMs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Existing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) use a variety of recall periods and response scales to assess CRS symptom burden. Global perspectives of CRS patients regarding optimal recall periods and response scales for CRS PROMs are unknown.
METHODS
METHODS
This was a multi-center, cross-sectional study recruiting 461 CRS patients from sites across the United States, Saudi Arabia, New Zealand, and Austria. Participants chose which CRS symptom recall period (1 day, 2 weeks, 1 month, >1 month) was most reflective of their current disease state and upon which to best base treatment recommendations (including surgery). Participants also chose which of six response scales (one visual analogue scale and five Likert scales ranging from four to eight items) was easiest to use, understand, and preferred.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A plurality of participants (40.0%) felt their CRS symptoms' current state was best reflected by a 1-month recall period. However, most patients (56.9%) preferred treatment recommendations to be determined by symptoms experienced over a >1 month period. The four- and five-item Likert scales were the easiest to understand (26.0% and 25.4%, respectively) and use (23.4% and 26.7%, respectively). The five-item (26.4% rating it most preferred and 70.9% rating it preferred) and four-item Likert (22.3% rating it most preferred and 56.4% rating it preferred) response scales were most preferred.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Future PROMs for CRS should consider assessment of symptoms over a 1-month period and use a four- or five-item Likert response scale to reflect global patient preferences. These findings also inform interpretation of current CRS PROMs.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy and American Rhinologic Society.
Références
Orlandi RR, Kingdom TT, Smith TL, et al. International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: rhinosinusitis 2021. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2021;11:213-739.
Fokkens WJ, Lund VJ, Hopkins C, et al. European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2020. Rhinology. 2020;58:1-464.
Tarasidis GS, DeConde AS, Mace JC, et al. Cognitive dysfunction associated with pain and quality of life in chronic rhinosinusitis. Int. Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2015;5:1004-1009.
Hoehle LP, Phillips KM, Bergmark RW, Caradonna DS, Gray ST, Sedaghat AR. Symptoms of chronic rhinosinusitis differentially impact general health-related quality of life. Rhinology. 2016;54:316-322.
Cox DR, Ashby S, DeConde AS, et al. Dyad of pain and depression in chronic rhinosinusitis. Int. Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2016;6:308-314.
Schlosser RJ, Storck K, Cortese BM, Uhde TW, Rudmik L, Soler ZM. Depression in chronic rhinosinusitis: a controlled cohort study. Am. J. Rhinol. Allergy. 2016;30:128-133.
Speth MM, Hoehle LP, Phillips KM, Caradonna DS, Gray ST, Sedaghat AR. Changes in chronic rhinosinusitis symptoms differentially associate with improvement in general health-related quality of life. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2018;121:195-199.
Rothrock NE, Kaiser KA, Cella D. Developing a valid patient-reported outcome measure. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011;90:737-742.
Clancy CM, Eisenberg JM. Outcomes research: measuring the end results of health care. Science. 1998;282:245-246.
Ahern S, Ruseckaite R, Ackerman IN. Collecting patient-reported outcome measures. Intern Med J. 2017;47:1454-1457.
Churruca K, Pomare C, Ellis LA, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): a review of generic and condition-specific measures and a discussion of trends and issues. Health Expect. 2021;24:1015-1024.
Weinfurt KP, Reeve BB. Patient-reported outcome measures in clinical research. JAMA. 2022;328:472-473.
Hsiao CJ, Dymek C, Kim B, Russell B. Advancing the use of patient-reported outcomes in practice: understanding challenges, opportunities, and the potential of health information technology. Qual Life Res. 2019;28:1575-1583.
Rudmik L, Hopkins C, Peters A, Smith TL, Schlosser RJ, Soler ZM. Patient-reported outcome measures for adult chronic rhinosinusitis: a systematic review and quality assessment. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2015;136:2.
Gengler I, Kavoosi TA, McCann AC, et al. Patient perspectives on recall period and response options in patient-reported outcome measures for chronic rhinosinusitis symptomatology: a pilot study. Clin Otolaryngol. 2021;46:1021-1027.
Hoehle LP, Phillips KM, Caradonna DS, Gray ST, Sedaghat AR. A contemporary analysis of clinical and demographic factors of chronic rhinosinusitis patients and their association with disease severity. Ir J Med Sci. 2018;187:215-221.
Psaltis AJ, Li G, Vaezeafshar R, Cho KS, Hwang PH. Modification of the Lund-Kennedy endoscopic scoring system improves its reliability and correlation with patient-reported outcome measures. Laryngoscope. 2014;124:2216-2223.
Hopkins C, Gillett S, Slack R, Lund VJ, Browne JP. Psychometric validity of the 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test. Clin Otolaryngol. 2009;34:447-454.
Alanazy F, Dousary SA, Albosaily A, Aldriweesh T, Alsaleh S, Aldrees T. Psychometric Arabic Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22: validation and translation in chronic rhinosinusitis patients. Ann Saudi Med. 2018;38:22-27.
Albrecht T, Beule AG, Hildenbrand T, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the 22-item sinonasal outcome test (SNOT-22) in German-speaking patients: a prospective, multicenter cohort study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2022;279:2433-2439.
Ali A, Fakunle DR, Yu V, et al. Heterogeneity in the definition of chronic rhinosinusitis disease control: a systematic review of the scientific literature. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2023. doi: 10.1007/s00405-023-08090-x
Gray ST, Phillips KM, Hoehle LP, Caradonna DS, Sedaghat AR. The 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test accurately reflects patient-reported control of chronic rhinosinusitis symptomatology. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2017;7:945-951.
Sedaghat AR, Phillips KM. Defining ‘control’ of chronic rhinosinusitis. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2023;31:17-23.
Sedaghat AR, Phillips KM. Chronic rhinosinusitis disease control: a review of the history and the evidence. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2023;19:903-910.
Fokkens WJ, Lund V, Bachert C, et al. EUFOREA consensus on biologics for CRSwNP with or without asthma. Allergy. 2019;74:2312-2319.
Rudmik L, Soler ZM, Hopkins C, et al. Defining appropriateness criteria for endoscopic sinus surgery during management of uncomplicated adult chronic rhinosinusitis: a RAND/UCLA appropriateness study. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2016;6:557-567.
Hopkins C, Rudmik L, Lund VJ. The predictive value of the preoperative Sinonasal Outcome Test-22 score in patients undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis. Laryngoscope. 2015;125:1779-1784.
Steele TO, Rudmik L, Mace JC, DeConde AS, Alt JA, Smith TL. Patient-centered decision making: the role of the baseline SNOT-22 in predicting outcomes for medical management of chronic rhinosinusitis. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2016;6:590-596.
Benninger MS, Senior BA. The development of the Rhinosinusitis Disability Index. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;123:1175-1179.
Gliklich RE, Metson R. Techniques for outcomes research in chronic sinusitis. Laryngoscope. 1995;105:387-390.
Zhang L, Zhang LH. Comparison of different endoscopic scoring systems in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis: reliability, validity, responsiveness and correlation. Rhinology. 2017;55:363-368.
Jeong SS, Chen T, Nguyen SA, Edwards TS, Schlosser RJ. Correlation of polyp grading scales with patient symptom scores and olfaction in chronic rhinosinusitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rhinology. 2022;60:322-334.
Ta NH, Gao J, Philpott C. A systematic review to examine the relationship between objective and patient-reported outcome measures in sinonasal disorders: recommendations for use in research and clinical practice. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2021;11:910-923.
Stull DE, Leidy NK, Parasuraman B, Chassany O. Optimal recall periods for patient-reported outcomes: challenges and potential solutions. Curr Med Res Opin. 2009;25:929-942.
Norquist JM, Girman C, Fehnel S, DeMuro-Mercon C, Santanello N. Choice of recall period for patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: criteria for consideration. Qual Life Res. 2012;21:1013-1020.