Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

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.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.bjps.2017.11.015

Type

Journal article

Journal

J plast reconstr aesthet surg

Publication Date

03/2018

Volume

71

Pages

283 - 289

Keywords

Patient outcome assessment, Patient-reported outcome measures, Quality of life, Treatment outcome, Humans, Patient Reported Outcome Measures, Patient Satisfaction, Quality of Life, Surgery, Plastic