Recommendations on the most suitable quality-of-life measurement instruments for bariatric and body contouring surgery: a systematic review

C. E.E. de Vries; M. C. Kalff; C. A.C. Prinsen; K. D. Coulman; C. den Haan; R. Welbourn; J. M. Blazeby; J. M. Morton; B. A. van Wagensveld

doi:10.1111/obr.12710

Recommendations on the most suitable quality-of-life measurement instruments for bariatric and body contouring surgery: a systematic review

C. E.E. de Vries^*, M. C. Kalff, C. A.C. Prinsen, K. D. Coulman, C. den Haan, R. Welbourn, J. M. Blazeby, J. M. Morton, B. A. van Wagensveld

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article (Academic Journal) › peer-review

53 Citations (Scopus)

483 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objective:
The objective of this study is to systematically assess the quality of existing patient-reported outcome measures developed and/or validated for Quality of Life measurement in bariatric surgery (BS) and body contouring surgery (BCS).

Methods:
We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL identifying studies on measurement properties of BS and BCS Quality of Life instruments. For all eligible studies, we evaluated the methodological quality of the studies by using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist and the quality of the measurement instruments by applying quality criteria. Four degrees of recommendation were assigned to validated instruments (A–D).

Results:
Out of 4,354 articles, a total of 26 articles describing 24 instruments were included. No instrument met all requirements (category A). Seven instruments have the potential to be recommended depending on further validation studies (category B). Of these seven, the BODY-Q has the strongest evidence for content validity in BS and BCS. Two instruments had poor quality in at least one required quality criterion (category C). Fifteen instruments were minimally validated (category D).

Conclusion:
The BODY-Q, developed for BS and BCS, possessed the strongest evidence for quality of measurement properties and has the potential to be recommended in future clinical trials.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1395-1411
Number of pages	17
Journal	Obesity Reviews
Volume	19
Issue number	10
Early online date	8 Jun 2018
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12710
Publication status	Published - 1 Oct 2018

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Authors. Obesity Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of World Obesity Federation.

Research Groups and Themes

Centre for Surgical Research

Keywords

Bariatric surgery
body contouring surgery
PRO measurement
quality of Life

Access to Document

10.1111/obr.12710Licence: CC BY-NC

Full-text PDF (final published version)
This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via Wiley at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/obr.12710 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Final published version, 158 KBLicence: CC BY-NC

Handle.net

Persistent link

Cite this

de Vries, C. E. E., Kalff, M. C., Prinsen, C. A. C., Coulman, K. D., den Haan, C., Welbourn, R., Blazeby, J. M., Morton, J. M., & van Wagensveld, B. A. (2018). Recommendations on the most suitable quality-of-life measurement instruments for bariatric and body contouring surgery: a systematic review. Obesity Reviews, 19(10), 1395-1411. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12710

@article{71b2ced54e554134865a5df6dd64e843,

title = "Recommendations on the most suitable quality-of-life measurement instruments for bariatric and body contouring surgery: a systematic review",

abstract = "Objective:The objective of this study is to systematically assess the quality of existing patient-reported outcome measures developed and/or validated for Quality of Life measurement in bariatric surgery (BS) and body contouring surgery (BCS).Methods:We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL identifying studies on measurement properties of BS and BCS Quality of Life instruments. For all eligible studies, we evaluated the methodological quality of the studies by using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist and the quality of the measurement instruments by applying quality criteria. Four degrees of recommendation were assigned to validated instruments (A–D).Results:Out of 4,354 articles, a total of 26 articles describing 24 instruments were included. No instrument met all requirements (category A). Seven instruments have the potential to be recommended depending on further validation studies (category B). Of these seven, the BODY-Q has the strongest evidence for content validity in BS and BCS. Two instruments had poor quality in at least one required quality criterion (category C). Fifteen instruments were minimally validated (category D).Conclusion:The BODY-Q, developed for BS and BCS, possessed the strongest evidence for quality of measurement properties and has the potential to be recommended in future clinical trials.",

keywords = "Bariatric surgery, body contouring surgery, PRO measurement, quality of Life",

author = "{de Vries}, {C. E.E.} and Kalff, {M. C.} and Prinsen, {C. A.C.} and Coulman, {K. D.} and {den Haan}, C. and R. Welbourn and Blazeby, {J. M.} and Morton, {J. M.} and {van Wagensveld}, {B. A.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2018 The Authors. Obesity Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of World Obesity Federation.",

year = "2018",

month = oct,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1111/obr.12710",

language = "English",

volume = "19",

pages = "1395--1411",

journal = "Obesity Reviews",

issn = "1467-7881",

publisher = "Wiley",

number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Recommendations on the most suitable quality-of-life measurement instruments for bariatric and body contouring surgery

T2 - a systematic review

AU - de Vries, C. E.E.

AU - Kalff, M. C.

AU - Prinsen, C. A.C.

AU - Coulman, K. D.

AU - den Haan, C.

AU - Welbourn, R.

AU - Blazeby, J. M.

AU - Morton, J. M.

AU - van Wagensveld, B. A.

PY - 2018/10/1

Y1 - 2018/10/1

N2 - Objective:The objective of this study is to systematically assess the quality of existing patient-reported outcome measures developed and/or validated for Quality of Life measurement in bariatric surgery (BS) and body contouring surgery (BCS).Methods:We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL identifying studies on measurement properties of BS and BCS Quality of Life instruments. For all eligible studies, we evaluated the methodological quality of the studies by using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist and the quality of the measurement instruments by applying quality criteria. Four degrees of recommendation were assigned to validated instruments (A–D).Results:Out of 4,354 articles, a total of 26 articles describing 24 instruments were included. No instrument met all requirements (category A). Seven instruments have the potential to be recommended depending on further validation studies (category B). Of these seven, the BODY-Q has the strongest evidence for content validity in BS and BCS. Two instruments had poor quality in at least one required quality criterion (category C). Fifteen instruments were minimally validated (category D).Conclusion:The BODY-Q, developed for BS and BCS, possessed the strongest evidence for quality of measurement properties and has the potential to be recommended in future clinical trials.

AB - Objective:The objective of this study is to systematically assess the quality of existing patient-reported outcome measures developed and/or validated for Quality of Life measurement in bariatric surgery (BS) and body contouring surgery (BCS).Methods:We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL identifying studies on measurement properties of BS and BCS Quality of Life instruments. For all eligible studies, we evaluated the methodological quality of the studies by using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist and the quality of the measurement instruments by applying quality criteria. Four degrees of recommendation were assigned to validated instruments (A–D).Results:Out of 4,354 articles, a total of 26 articles describing 24 instruments were included. No instrument met all requirements (category A). Seven instruments have the potential to be recommended depending on further validation studies (category B). Of these seven, the BODY-Q has the strongest evidence for content validity in BS and BCS. Two instruments had poor quality in at least one required quality criterion (category C). Fifteen instruments were minimally validated (category D).Conclusion:The BODY-Q, developed for BS and BCS, possessed the strongest evidence for quality of measurement properties and has the potential to be recommended in future clinical trials.

KW - Bariatric surgery

KW - body contouring surgery

KW - PRO measurement

KW - quality of Life

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053387525&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/obr.12710

DO - 10.1111/obr.12710

M3 - Review article (Academic Journal)

C2 - 29883059

AN - SCOPUS:85053387525

SN - 1467-7881

VL - 19

SP - 1395

EP - 1411

JO - Obesity Reviews

JF - Obesity Reviews

IS - 10

ER -

Recommendations on the most suitable quality-of-life measurement instruments for bariatric and body contouring surgery: a systematic review

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Research Groups and Themes

Keywords

Access to Document

Handle.net

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Dr Karen D Coulman

Cite this

Recommendations on the most suitable quality-of-life measurement instruments for bariatric and body contouring surgery: a systematic review

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Research Groups and Themes

Keywords

Access to Document

Handle.net

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Profiles

Dr Karen D Coulman

Cite this