Outcome measurement in plastic surgery

Outcome measurement in plastic surgery is often surgeon-centred, and clinician-derived. Greater emphasis is being placed on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in which the patients' perspective is measured directly from them. Numerous patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery reconstructive & aesthetic surgery, 2018-03, Vol.71 (3), p.283-289
Hauptverfasser: Wormald, Justin C.R., Rodrigues, Jeremy N.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 289
container_issue 3
container_start_page 283
container_title Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery
container_volume 71
creator Wormald, Justin C.R.
Rodrigues, Jeremy N.
description Outcome measurement in plastic surgery is often surgeon-centred, and clinician-derived. Greater emphasis is being placed on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in which the patients' perspective is measured directly from them. Numerous patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed in a range of fields, with a number of good quality PROMs in plastic surgery. They can be deployed to support diagnosis, disease severity determination, referral pathways, treatment decision-making, post-operative care and in determining cost-effectiveness. In order to understand the impact of disease and health interventions, appropriate PROMs are a logical choice in plastic surgery, where many conditions involve detriment of function or cosmesis. PROMS can be classified as disease-specific, domain-specific, dimension-specific, population-specific and generic. Choosing the correct outcome and measure can be nebulous. The two most important considerations are: is it suitable for the intended purpose? And how valid is it? Measurement that combines being patient-centred and aligning with clinicians' understanding is achievable, and can be studied scientifically. Rational design of new PROMs and considered choice of measures is critical in clinical practice and research. There are a number of tools that can be employed to assess the quality of PROMs that are outlined in this overview. Clinicians should consider the quality of measures both in their own practice and when critically appraising evidence. This overview of outcome measurement in plastic surgery provides a tool set enabling plastic surgeons to understand, implement and analyse outcome measures across clinical and academic practice.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.bjps.2017.11.015
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1976449080</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1748681517304813</els_id><sourcerecordid>1976449080</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-523403eea61244ec10c2b95a467d39db2096c3fcfa3767df90bbb3f16a3631143</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtKxEAQRRtRnHH0B1xIVuImsaofeYAbGXzBwGx03XQ6FUnIy-5EmL83w4wuXVVRnHuhDmPXCBECxvd1lNeDjzhgEiFGgOqELTFN0hCUyE7nPZFpGKeoFuzC-xpACpTqnC14xoVQoJbsdjuNtm8paMn4yVFL3RhUXTA0xo-VDebbJ7ndJTsrTePp6jhX7OP56X39Gm62L2_rx01oJcAYKi4kCCITI5eSLILleaaMjJNCZEXOIYutKG1pRDKfygzyPBclxkbEAlGKFbs79A6u_5rIj7qtvKWmMR31k9eYJbGUGaQwo_yAWtd776jUg6ta43YaQe_96Frv_ei9H42oZz9z6ObYP-UtFX-RXyEz8HAAaP7yuyKnva2os1RUjuyoi776r_8HmQx1Kg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1976449080</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Outcome measurement in plastic surgery</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Wormald, Justin C.R. ; Rodrigues, Jeremy N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Wormald, Justin C.R. ; Rodrigues, Jeremy N.</creatorcontrib><description>Outcome measurement in plastic surgery is often surgeon-centred, and clinician-derived. Greater emphasis is being placed on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in which the patients' perspective is measured directly from them. Numerous patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed in a range of fields, with a number of good quality PROMs in plastic surgery. They can be deployed to support diagnosis, disease severity determination, referral pathways, treatment decision-making, post-operative care and in determining cost-effectiveness. In order to understand the impact of disease and health interventions, appropriate PROMs are a logical choice in plastic surgery, where many conditions involve detriment of function or cosmesis. PROMS can be classified as disease-specific, domain-specific, dimension-specific, population-specific and generic. Choosing the correct outcome and measure can be nebulous. The two most important considerations are: is it suitable for the intended purpose? And how valid is it? Measurement that combines being patient-centred and aligning with clinicians' understanding is achievable, and can be studied scientifically. Rational design of new PROMs and considered choice of measures is critical in clinical practice and research. There are a number of tools that can be employed to assess the quality of PROMs that are outlined in this overview. Clinicians should consider the quality of measures both in their own practice and when critically appraising evidence. This overview of outcome measurement in plastic surgery provides a tool set enabling plastic surgeons to understand, implement and analyse outcome measures across clinical and academic practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1748-6815</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-0539</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2017.11.015</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29233505</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Humans ; Patient outcome assessment ; Patient Reported Outcome Measures ; Patient Satisfaction ; Quality of Life ; Surgery, Plastic ; Treatment outcome</subject><ispartof>Journal of plastic, reconstructive &amp; aesthetic surgery, 2018-03, Vol.71 (3), p.283-289</ispartof><rights>2017 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-523403eea61244ec10c2b95a467d39db2096c3fcfa3767df90bbb3f16a3631143</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-523403eea61244ec10c2b95a467d39db2096c3fcfa3767df90bbb3f16a3631143</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6197-4093</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1748681517304813$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29233505$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wormald, Justin C.R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodrigues, Jeremy N.</creatorcontrib><title>Outcome measurement in plastic surgery</title><title>Journal of plastic, reconstructive &amp; aesthetic surgery</title><addtitle>J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg</addtitle><description>Outcome measurement in plastic surgery is often surgeon-centred, and clinician-derived. Greater emphasis is being placed on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in which the patients' perspective is measured directly from them. Numerous patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed in a range of fields, with a number of good quality PROMs in plastic surgery. They can be deployed to support diagnosis, disease severity determination, referral pathways, treatment decision-making, post-operative care and in determining cost-effectiveness. In order to understand the impact of disease and health interventions, appropriate PROMs are a logical choice in plastic surgery, where many conditions involve detriment of function or cosmesis. PROMS can be classified as disease-specific, domain-specific, dimension-specific, population-specific and generic. Choosing the correct outcome and measure can be nebulous. The two most important considerations are: is it suitable for the intended purpose? And how valid is it? Measurement that combines being patient-centred and aligning with clinicians' understanding is achievable, and can be studied scientifically. Rational design of new PROMs and considered choice of measures is critical in clinical practice and research. There are a number of tools that can be employed to assess the quality of PROMs that are outlined in this overview. Clinicians should consider the quality of measures both in their own practice and when critically appraising evidence. This overview of outcome measurement in plastic surgery provides a tool set enabling plastic surgeons to understand, implement and analyse outcome measures across clinical and academic practice.</description><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Patient outcome assessment</subject><subject>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Surgery, Plastic</subject><subject>Treatment outcome</subject><issn>1748-6815</issn><issn>1878-0539</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMtKxEAQRRtRnHH0B1xIVuImsaofeYAbGXzBwGx03XQ6FUnIy-5EmL83w4wuXVVRnHuhDmPXCBECxvd1lNeDjzhgEiFGgOqELTFN0hCUyE7nPZFpGKeoFuzC-xpACpTqnC14xoVQoJbsdjuNtm8paMn4yVFL3RhUXTA0xo-VDebbJ7ndJTsrTePp6jhX7OP56X39Gm62L2_rx01oJcAYKi4kCCITI5eSLILleaaMjJNCZEXOIYutKG1pRDKfygzyPBclxkbEAlGKFbs79A6u_5rIj7qtvKWmMR31k9eYJbGUGaQwo_yAWtd776jUg6ta43YaQe_96Frv_ei9H42oZz9z6ObYP-UtFX-RXyEz8HAAaP7yuyKnva2os1RUjuyoi776r_8HmQx1Kg</recordid><startdate>201803</startdate><enddate>201803</enddate><creator>Wormald, Justin C.R.</creator><creator>Rodrigues, Jeremy N.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6197-4093</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201803</creationdate><title>Outcome measurement in plastic surgery</title><author>Wormald, Justin C.R. ; Rodrigues, Jeremy N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-523403eea61244ec10c2b95a467d39db2096c3fcfa3767df90bbb3f16a3631143</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Patient outcome assessment</topic><topic>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Surgery, Plastic</topic><topic>Treatment outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wormald, Justin C.R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodrigues, Jeremy N.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of plastic, reconstructive &amp; aesthetic surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wormald, Justin C.R.</au><au>Rodrigues, Jeremy N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Outcome measurement in plastic surgery</atitle><jtitle>Journal of plastic, reconstructive &amp; aesthetic surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg</addtitle><date>2018-03</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>71</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>283</spage><epage>289</epage><pages>283-289</pages><issn>1748-6815</issn><eissn>1878-0539</eissn><abstract>Outcome measurement in plastic surgery is often surgeon-centred, and clinician-derived. Greater emphasis is being placed on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in which the patients' perspective is measured directly from them. Numerous patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed in a range of fields, with a number of good quality PROMs in plastic surgery. They can be deployed to support diagnosis, disease severity determination, referral pathways, treatment decision-making, post-operative care and in determining cost-effectiveness. In order to understand the impact of disease and health interventions, appropriate PROMs are a logical choice in plastic surgery, where many conditions involve detriment of function or cosmesis. PROMS can be classified as disease-specific, domain-specific, dimension-specific, population-specific and generic. Choosing the correct outcome and measure can be nebulous. The two most important considerations are: is it suitable for the intended purpose? And how valid is it? Measurement that combines being patient-centred and aligning with clinicians' understanding is achievable, and can be studied scientifically. Rational design of new PROMs and considered choice of measures is critical in clinical practice and research. There are a number of tools that can be employed to assess the quality of PROMs that are outlined in this overview. Clinicians should consider the quality of measures both in their own practice and when critically appraising evidence. This overview of outcome measurement in plastic surgery provides a tool set enabling plastic surgeons to understand, implement and analyse outcome measures across clinical and academic practice.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>29233505</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.bjps.2017.11.015</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6197-4093</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1748-6815
ispartof Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery, 2018-03, Vol.71 (3), p.283-289
issn 1748-6815
1878-0539
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1976449080
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Humans
Patient outcome assessment
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Patient Satisfaction
Quality of Life
Surgery, Plastic
Treatment outcome
title Outcome measurement in plastic surgery
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T17%3A25%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Outcome%20measurement%20in%20plastic%20surgery&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20plastic,%20reconstructive%20&%20aesthetic%20surgery&rft.au=Wormald,%20Justin%20C.R.&rft.date=2018-03&rft.volume=71&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=283&rft.epage=289&rft.pages=283-289&rft.issn=1748-6815&rft.eissn=1878-0539&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.bjps.2017.11.015&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1976449080%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1976449080&rft_id=info:pmid/29233505&rft_els_id=S1748681517304813&rfr_iscdi=true