Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials

A Comparison of Health Professionals’ and Patients’ Views of the Importance of Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery

General Information

Abstract:
Background: A comprehensive evaluation of bariatric surgery is required to inform decision-making. This will include measures of benefit and risk. It is possible that stakeholders involved with surgery value these outcomes differently, although this has not previously been explored. This study aimed to investigate and compare how professionals and patients prioritise outcomes of bariatric surgery.

Methods: Systematic reviews and qualitative interviews created an exhaustive list of outcomes. This informed the development of a 130-item questionnaire, structured in four sections (complications of surgery; clinical effectiveness; signs, symptoms, and other measures; quality of life). Health professionals and patients rated the importance of each item on a 1–9 scale. Items rated 8–9 by at least 70 % of the participants were considered prioritised. Items prioritised in each section were compared between professionals and patients and interrater agreement assessed using kappa statistics (?).

Results: One hundred sixty-eight out of four hundred fifty-nine professionals (36.6 %) and 90/465 patients (19.4 %) completed the questionnaire. Professionals and patients prioritised 18 and 25 items, respectively, with 10 overlapping items and 23 discordant items (? 0.363). Examples of items prioritised by both included ‘diabetes’ and ‘leakage from bowel joins’. Examples of discordant items included ‘re-admission rates’ (professionals only) and ‘excess skin’ (patients only). Poor agreement was seen in the ‘quality of life’ section (0 overlapping items, 8 discordant, ? -0.036).

Conclusions: Although there was some overlap of outcomes prioritised by professionals and patients, there were important differences. We recommend that the views of all relevant health professionals and patients are considered when deciding on outcomes to evaluate bariatric surgery.

Aim:
To investigate and compare how professionals and patients prioritise outcomes of bariatric surgery.

Authors:
Karen D. Coulman, Noah Howes, James Hopkins, Katie Whale, Katy Chalmers, Sara Brookes, Alex Nicholson, Jelena Savovic, Yasmin Ferguson, Amanda Owen-Smith, Jane Blazeby, On behalf of the By-Band-Sleeve Trial Management Group, Jane Blazeby, Richard Welbourn, James Byrne, Jenny Donovan, Barnaby C. Reeves, Sarah Wordsworth, Robert Andrews, Janice L. Thompson, Graziella Mazza, and Chris A. Rogers

Publication

Journal:
Obesity Surgery
Volume:
26
Issue:
11
Pages:
2738 - 2746
Year:
2016
DOI:
Further Study Information

Date:
Funding source(s):

Health Area

Disease Category
Endocrine & metabolic

Disease Name
Obesity

Target Population

Age Range
18 - 100

Sex
Either


Nature / type of Intervention
Surgery

Method(s)

Delphi process
Interview
Systematic review

Stakeholders Involved

Clinical experts
Consumers (patients)
Study investigators

Study Type

Patient perspectives
Systematic review of outcomes measured in trials
Systematic review of qualitative research

The site uses cookies, some may have been set already. Please refer to our privacy policy & cookie usage statement.
If you continue to use the site we'll assume you're happy to accept the cookies.