Format

Send to

Choose Destination

See 1 citation found by title matching your search:

Thorax. 2018 Jan;73(1):7-12. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2017-210234. Epub 2017 Jul 29.

Perspectives of survivors, families and researchers on key outcomes for research in acute respiratory failure.

Author information

1
Outcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery Group, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
2
Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
3
Department of Biostatistics, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
4
Johns Hopkins Arthritis Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
5
Rheumatic Diseases Research Core Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
6
Divisions of Rheumatology and Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
7
Department of Epidemiology, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
8
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

There is heterogeneity among the outcomes evaluated in studies of survivors of acute respiratory failure (ARF).

AIM:

To evaluate the importance of specific outcome domains to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) survivors, their family members and clinical researchers.

METHODS:

Nineteen outcome domains were identified from the National Institutes of Health's Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System; WHO's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health; Society of Critical Care Medicine's Post-Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS); as well as patient, clinician and researcher input. We surveyed ARDS survivors, family members and critical care researchers, 279 respondents in total, using a 5-point scale (strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree) to rate the importance of measuring each domain in studies of ARF survivors' postdischarge outcomes.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:

At least 80% of patients and family members supported (ie, rated 'agree' or 'strongly agree') that 15 of the 19 domains should be measured in all future studies. Among researchers, 6 of 19 domains were supported, with researchers less supportive for all domains, except survival (95% vs 72% support). Overall, four domains were supported by all groups: physical function, cognitive function, return to work or prior activities and mental health.

CONCLUSION:

Patient, family and researcher groups supported inclusion of outcome domains that fit within the PICS framework. Patients and family members also supported many additional domains, emphasising the importance of including patients/family, along with researchers, in consensus processes to select core outcome domains for future research studies.

KEYWORDS:

adult; follow-up studies; intensive care; patient outcome assessment; patient-centered outcomes research; respiratory

PMID:
28756400
DOI:
10.1136/thoraxjnl-2017-210234
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for HighWire
Loading ...
Support Center