Measurement properties of health-related quality of life measures for people living with metastatic disease of the spine: a systematic review
Authors:
Qiao, L., Ding, X., He, S., Zhang, F., Yu, W., Zhang, L., Chen, D., Gao, X., Chu, P., Yan, Y., Huang, Q., Yang, X., and Yin, M.
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Patients with spinal metastases (SM) suffer from a significant quality of life (QoL) deterioration. The measurement of QoL has garnered significant attention. In this study, the authors aimed to investigate the frequency of QoL measurement, systematically appraise the measurement properties of identified instruments, and facilitate the effective selection of an appropriate QoL instrument for patients with SM.
METHODS: This systematic review adhered to the newly revised Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Measurement property results were assessed using the adapted criteria. Each measurement property was allocated a separate rating (excellent, good, fair, or poor). 'Best evidence synthesis' was performed using COSMIN outcomes and the quality of findings.
RESULT: Two hundred and nine publications were included, and 18 instruments were identified. ECOG, EuroQol-5D, SF-36, SOSGOQ, and EORTC-QLQ-C30 were the top five instruments used for patients with SM in published literature. The measurement properties evaluated included internal consistency (four instruments), reliability (three instruments), validity (five instruments), validity (nine measures), floor and ceiling effects (four instruments), responsiveness (four instruments), and interpretability (three measures). Based on the limited evidence, the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) had the best methodological quality.
CONCLUSIONS: Owing to the limitations of BPI in assessment domains, we cannot fully support the use of BPI. For the lack of high-quality research, it is challenging to nominate a single appropriate measure. Additional studies are needed to explore the evidence before a confirmatory decision is made.
| 