Citation

Griffiths C, Guest E, White P, Gaskin E, Rumsey N, Pleat J, Harcourt D. J. Burn Care Res. 2016; 38(2): e521-e545.

Affiliation

From the *Centre for Appearance Research (CAR), University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom; †Department of Engineering Design and Mathematics, University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom; and ‡Department of Plastic Surgery, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, United Kingdom.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2016, American Burn Association, Publisher Lippincott Williams and Wilkins)

DOI

10.1097/BCR.0000000000000474

PMID

27893571

Abstract

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are vital for evaluating patient needs and therapeutic progress. This review aimed to identify the PROMs used in adult burn care and establish their quality. Computerized bibliographic searches of Psychinfo, Social Sciences Citation Index, Cinahl, Psycharticles, AMED, Medline, and HAPI were used to find English-language articles using English-language PROMs from January 2001 to September 2016. Psychometric quality assessment of the PROMs was conducted. A total of 117 studies achieved the entry criteria and reported using 77 different PROMs (71 generic and 6 burn-specific). Overall, the psychometric quality of the PROMs was low; only 17 (13 generic and 4 burn-specific) had psychometric evidence appropriate to adults with burn injuries completing an English language version of the PROM. Although this review identified a number of generic and burn-specific PROMs that have some psychometric evidence with adult burn patients, research is still needed to further examine these preexisting measures and validate them in different languages. This will enable researchers and clinicians to better understand the potential impact of a burn injury on adults, and evaluate the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions.

Language: en