Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen

Welkom bij Scalda & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Scalda heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen.Je kunt de producten hieronder links aanschaffen en rechts inloggen.

» Andere revante producten voor Scalda studenten en medewerkers.

Registreer

Schaf de BSL Academy aan: 

BSL Academy mbo AG

Eenmaal aangeschaft kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met Jan van der Velden.

Login

Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in:

23-08-2024 | Review

Agreement between patient- and proxy-reported outcome measures in adult musculoskeletal trauma and injury: a scoping review

Auteurs: Jochem H. Raats, Noa H. M. Ponds, D. T. Brameier, P. A. Bain, H. J. Schuijt, D. van der Velde, M. J. Weaver

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 1/2025

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used in medicine. As older adults, who may rely on a proxy caregiver for answers due to cognitive impairment, are representing an increasing share of the traumatically injured patient population, proxy-reported outcome measures (proxROMs) offer a valuable alternative source of patient-centered information although its association with PROMs is unclear. The objective of this scoping review is to discuss all available literature comparing PROM and proxROMs in adult patients with musculoskeletal trauma to guide future research in this field.

Methods

The PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews was used to guide this review. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched without date limit for articles comparing PROM and proxROMs in setting of musculoskeletal trauma. Abstract and full-text screening were performed by two independent reviewers. Variables included study details, patient and proxy characteristics, and reported findings on agreement between PROMs and proxROMs.

Results

Of 574 unique records screened, 13 were included. Patient and proxy characteristics varied greatly, while patients’ cognitive status and type of proxy perspective were poorly addressed. 18 different PROMs were evaluated, mostly reporting on physical functioning and disability (nine, 50%) or quality of life (six, 33%). Injury- and proxy-specific tools were rare, and psychometric properties of PROMs were often not described. Studies reported moderate to good agreement between PROMs and proxROMs. There is less agreement on subjective outcome measures (e.g., depression score) compared to observable items, and proxy bias results in in worse outcomes compared to patient self-reports.

Conclusion

Current literature, though limited, demonstrates moderate to good agreement between injured patients’ self- and proxy-reports. Future studies should be mindful of current guidelines on proxy reporting when developing their studies and consider including neglected populations such as cognitively impaired patients to improve clinical validity.
vorige artikel He/She/They - gender inclusivity in developing and using health-related questionnaires: a scoping review
volgende artikel A landscape review to identify what matters to patients with thrombotic cardiovascular diseases and patient-reported outcome instruments which can be used to capture the patient experience
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
Churruca, K., Pomare, C., Ellis, L. A., Long, J. C., Henderson, S. B., Murphy, L. E. D., Leahy, C. J., & Braithwaite, J. (2021). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): A review of generic and condition-specific measures and a discussion of trends and issues. Health Expectations, 24, 1015–1024.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
2.
Siljander, M. P., McQuivey, K. S., Fahs, A. M., Galasso, L. A., Serdahely, K. J., & Karadsheh, M. S. (2018). Current trends in patient-reported outcome measures in total joint arthroplasty: A study of 4 major orthopaedic journals. Journal of Arthroplasty, 33, 3416–3421.PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
Lapin, B., Cohen, M. L., Corsini, N., Lanzi, A., Smith, S. C., Bennett, A. V., Mayo, N., Mercieca-Bebber, R., Mitchell, S. A., Rutherford, C., & Roydhouse, J. (2023). Development of consensus-based considerations for use of adult proxy reporting: an ISOQOL task force initiative. Journal of Patient Reported Outcomes, 7, 52.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
5.
Kerklaan, J., Hannan, E., Baumgart, A., Manera, K. E., Ju, A., McCulloch, M., Admani, B., Dominello, A., Esezobor, C., Foster, B., Hamilton, A., Jankauskiene, A., Johnson, R. J., Liu, I., Marks, S. D., Neu, A., Schaefer, F., Sutton, S., Wolfenden, S., Craig, J. C., Groothoff, J., Howell, M., Tong, A. (2020). Patient- and parent proxy-reported outcome measures for life participation in children with chronic kidney disease: A systematic review. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 35, 1924–1937.CrossRef
6.
7.
Kalle, J. P. R., Saris, T. F. F., Sierevelt, I. N., Eygendaal, D., & van Bergen, C. J. A. (2022). Quality of patient- and proxy-reported outcomes for children with impairment of the upper extremity: A systematic review using the COSMIN methodology. Journal of Patient Reported Outcomes, 6, 58.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
8.
Cite Khanna, D., Khadka, J., Mpundu-Kaambwa, C., Lay, K., Russo, R., Ratcliffe, J., Quality of Life in Kids: Key Evidence to Strengthen Decisions in Australia (QUOKKA) Project Team. (2022). Are we agreed? Self- versus proxy-reporting of paediatric Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) using generic preference-based measures: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PharmacoEconomics, 40, 1043–1067.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
9.
Santoro, S. L., Donelan, K., & Constantine, M. (2022). Proxy-report in individuals with intellectual disability: A scoping review. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 35, 1088–1108.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
10.
Oldenburger, E., Devlies, J., Callens, D., & De Roo, M. L. (2023). Patient-reported outcomes versus proxy-reported outcomes in supportive and palliative care: A summary of recent literature. Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care, 17, 113–118.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Oczkowski, C., & O’Donnell, M. (2010). Reliability of proxy respondents for patients with stroke: a systematic review. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases, 19, 410–416.PubMedCrossRef
12.
13.
Wilson, I., Bohm, E., Lübbeke, A., Lyman, S., Overgaard, S., Rolfson, O., Dahl, A. W., Wilkinson, M., & Dunbar, M. (2019). Orthopaedic registries with patient-reported outcome measures. EFORT Open Review, 4, 357–367.CrossRef
14.
Chow, A., Mayer, E. K., Darzi, A. W., & Athanasiou, T. (2009). Patient-reported outcome measures: The importance of patient satisfaction in surgery. Surgery, 146, 435–443.PubMedCrossRef
15.
16.
Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M. F., Kind, P., Parkin, D., Bonsel, G., & Badia, X. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research, 20, 1727–1736.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
Jiang, L., Zheng, Z., & Zhang, M. (2020). The incidence of geriatric trauma is increasing and comparison of different scoring tools for the prediction of in-hospital mortality in geriatric trauma patients. World Journal of Emergency Surgery, 15, 59.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
18.
Grigoryan, K. V., Javedan, H., & Rudolph, J. L. (2014). Orthogeriatric care models and outcomes in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Orthopedic Trauma, 28, e49-55.CrossRef
19.
Van Heghe, A., Mordant, G., Dupont, J., Dejaeger, M., Laurent, M. R., & Gielen, E. (2022). Effects of orthogeriatric care models on outcomes of hip fracture patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Calcified Tissue International, 110, 162–184.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Park, C., Bharija, A., Mesias, M., Mitchell, A., Krishna, P., Storr-Street, N., Brown, A., Martin, M., Lu, A. C., & Staudenmayer, K. L. (2022). Association between implementation of a geriatric trauma clinical pathway and changes in rates of delirium in older adults with traumatic injury. JAMA Surgery, 157, 676–683.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Ferrah, N., Kennedy, B., Beck, B., Ibrahim, J., Gabbe, B., & Cameron, P. (2024). A scoping review of models of care for the management of older trauma patients. Injury, 55, 111200.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Schuijt, H. J., Lehmann, L. S., Javedan, H., von Keudell, A. G., & Weaver, M. J. (2021). A culture change in geriatric traumatology: Holistic and patient-tailored care for frail patients with fractures. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery of American, 103, e72.
23.
Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O'Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, EA., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., Lewin, S., Godfrey, C. M., Macdonald, M. T., Langlois, E. V., Soares-Weiser, K., Moriarty, J., Clifford, T., Tunçalp, Ö., Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473. PubMedCrossRef
24.
Raats, J. (2024). Agreement between patient- and proxy-reported outcome measures in musculoskeletal trauma and injury: A scoping review protocol. OSF Preprint at osf.io/c9psz.
25.
Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A Guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15, 155–163.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159.PubMedCrossRef
27.
McGraw, C., Vogel, R., Redmond, D., Pekarek, J., Tanner, A., Lynch, N., & Bar-Or, D. (2021). Comparing satisfaction of trauma patients 55 years or older to their caregivers during palliative care: Who faces the burden? Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 90, 305–312.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Stuart, A. R., Higgins, T. F., Hung, M., Weir, C. R., Kubiak, E. N., Rothberg, D. L., & Saltzman, C. L. (2015). Reliability in measuring preinjury physical function in orthopaedic trauma. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 29(527), 532.
29.
Shardell, M., Alley, D. E., Miller, R. R., Hicks, G. E., & Magaziner, J. (2012). Comparing reports from hip-fracture patients and their proxies: Implications on evaluating sex differences in disability and depressive symptoms. Journal of Aging and Health, 24, 367–383.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Magaziner, J., Zimmerman, S. I., Gruber-Baldini, A. L., Hebel, J. R., & Fox, K. M. (1997). Proxy reporting in five areas of functional status: Comparison with self-reports and observations of performance. American Journal of Epidemiology, 146, 418–428.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Yasuda, N., Zimmerman, S., Hawkes, W. G., Gruber-Baldini, A. L., Hebel, J. R., & Magaziner, J. (2004). Concordance of proxy-perceived change and measured change in multiple domains of function in older persons. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52, 1157–1162.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Magaziner, J., Simonsick, E. M., Kashner, T. M., & Hebel, J. R. (1988). Patient-proxy response comparability on measures of patient health and functional status. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 41, 1065–1074.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Jones, C. A., & Feeny, D. H. (2006). Agreement between patient and proxy responses during recovery after hip fracture: Evidence for the FIM instrument. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 87, 1382–1387.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Jones, C. A., & Feeny, D. H. (2005). Agreement between patient and proxy responses of health-related quality of life after hip fracture. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53, 1227–1233.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Alvarez-Nebreda, M. L., Heng, M., Rosner, B., McTague, M., Javedan, H., Harris, M. B., & Weaver, M. J. (2019). Reliability of proxy-reported patient-reported outcomes measurement information system physical function and pain interference responses for elderly patients with musculoskeletal injury. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 27, e156–e165.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Maxwell, C. A., Dietrich, M. S., Minnick, A. F., & Mion, L. C. (2015). Preinjury physical function and frailty in injured older adults: Self- versus proxy responses. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 63, 1443–1447.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Gabbe, B. J., Lyons, R. A., Sutherland, A. M., Hart, M. J., & Cameron, P. A. (2012). Level of agreement between patient and proxy responses to the EQ-5D health questionnaire 12 months after injury. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 72, 1102–1105.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Badia, X., Diaz-Prieto, A., Gorriz, M., Herdman, M., Torrado, H., Farrero, E., & Cavanilles, J. (2001). Using the euroqol-5d to measure changes in quality of life 12 months after discharge from an intensive care unit. Intensive Care Medicine, 27, 1901–1907.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Peter, W. F., Dagfinrud, H. S., Østerås, N., & Terwee, C. B. (2017). Animated Activity Questionnaire (AAQ), a new method of self-reporting activity limitations in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis: Comparisons with observation by spouses for construct validity. Musculoskeletal Care, 15, 263–271.PubMedCrossRef
40.
41.
Pickard, A. S., & Knight, S. J. (2005). Proxy evaluation of health-related quality of life: A conceptual framework for understanding multiple proxy perspectives. Medical Care, 43, 493–499.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
42.
Grogan Moore, M. L., Jayakumar, P., Laverty, D., Hill, A. D., & Koenig, K. M. (2019). Patient-reported outcome measures and patient activation: What are their roles in orthopedic trauma? Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 33, S38–S42.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Smit, E. B., Bouwstra, H., van der Wouden, J. C., Hertogh, C. M. P. M., Wattel, E. M., Roorda, L. D., Terwee, C. B. (2020). Development of a Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) short form for measuring physical function in geriatric rehabilitation patients. Quality of Life Research, 29, 2563–2572.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
44.
Smit, E. B., Bouwstra, H., Roorda, L. D., van der Wouden, J. H. C., Wattel, E. L. M., Hertogh, C. M..P. M., Terwee, C. B. (2021). A patient-reported outcomes measurement information system short form for measuring physical function during geriatric rehabilitation: test-retest reliability, construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretability. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 22, 1627-1632.e1.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Lapin, B. R., Thompson, N. R., Schuster, A., & Katzan, I. L. (2021). Patient-proxy agreement on change in acute stroke patient-reported outcome measures: A prospective study. Journal of Patient Reported Outcomes, 5, 53.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
46.
Lapin, B. R., Thompson, N. R., Schuster, A., Honomichl, R., & Katzan, I. L. (2021). The validity of proxy responses on patient-reported outcome measures: Are proxies a reliable alternative to stroke patients’ self-report? Quality of Life Research, 30, 1735–1745.PubMedCrossRef
47.
McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1, 30–46.CrossRef
48.
49.
Stalvey, B. T., Owsley, C., Sloane, M. E., & Ball, K. (1999). The life space questionnaire: A measure of the extent of mobility of older adults. The Journal of Applied Gerontology, 18, 460–478.CrossRef
50.
Saliba, D., Elliott, M., Rubenstein, L. Z., Solomon, D. H., Young, R. T., Kamberg, C. J., Roth, C., MacLean, C. H., Shekelle, P. G., Sloss, E. M., Wenger, N. S. (2001). The vulnerable elders survey: A tool for identifying vulnerable older people in the community | enhanced reader. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 49, 1691–1699.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Temple, R. (2011). Encyclopedia of clinical neuropsychology. New York: Springer.
52.
Brooks, R., & De Charro, F. (1996). EuroQol: The current state of play. Health Policy (New York), 37, 53–72.CrossRef
53.
Metagegevens
Titel
Agreement between patient- and proxy-reported outcome measures in adult musculoskeletal trauma and injury: a scoping review
Auteurs
Jochem H. Raats
Noa H. M. Ponds
D. T. Brameier
P. A. Bain
H. J. Schuijt
D. van der Velde
M. J. Weaver
Publicatiedatum
23-08-2024
Uitgeverij
Springer New York
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 1/2025
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-024-03766-1

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2025

Bidirectional association between frailty and quality of life within English longitudinal study of aging

  • Open Access

A landscape review to identify what matters to patients with thrombotic cardiovascular diseases and patient-reported outcome instruments which can be used to capture the patient experience

  • Open Access

Impact of rehabilitation with dental implants on the quality of life of patients undergoing maxillofacial reconstruction: a systematic review

  • Open Access

The PROMIS-16 reproduces the PROMIS-29 physical and mental health summary scores accurately in a probability-based internet panel

  • Open Access

Conceptualizing meaningful between-group difference in change over time: a demonstration of possible viewpoints

  • Commentary

Development of an ultra-short measure of eight domains of health-related quality of life for research and clinical care: the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system® PROMIS®-16 profile

  • Open Access