ArticleBMC health services research2018
Measurement of patient reported disability using WHODAS 2.0 before and after surgical intervention in Madagascar.
Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Measuring patient disability in the peri-operative period using the WHODAS 2.0 questionnaire: a systematic review.Anaesthesia · 2026Pooled it
- Relationship between preoperative disability and postoperative major outcomes in elderly patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Disability and Factors Associated with Disability in the Discharge Transition Phase After Acquired Brain Injury: An Observational Follow-Up Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Post-intensive care syndrome and pulmonary fibrosis in patients surviving ARDS-pneumonia of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 etiologies.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Psychometric properties of the 12-item WHODAS applied through phone survey: an experience in PERSIAN Traffic Cohort.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2022Article
- Short Message Service-Based Collection of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures on Hand Surgery Global Outreach Trips: A Pilot Feasibility Study.The Journal of hand surgery · 2022Article
- The 12 items Amharic version WHODAS-2 showed cultural adaptation and used to measure disability among road traffic trauma victims in Ethiopia.BMC psychology · 2021Article
- Accountability in global surgery missions.BMJ global health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient reported outcomes (PRO) measure the quality of care from the patient's perspective. PROs are an important measure of surgical outcome and can be used to calculate health gains after surgical treatment. The World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 is a PRO used to evaluate pre and post-operative disability across a range of surgical specialities. In this study, Mercy Ships, a non-governmental organisation (NGO), used WHODAS 2.0 to evaluate patient reported disability in 401 consecutive patients in Madagascar. We hypothesised that surgical interventions would decrease pre-operative patient reported disability across a range of specialties (maxillofacial, plastic, orthopaedic, general and obstetric fistula surgery).
methodWHODAS 2.0 was administered preoperatively by face-to-face interview, and at 3 months post-operatively by telephone. Demographic data, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical classification score, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, and in-hospital post-operative complications were collected from a separately maintained patient database. The primary outcome measure was difference in pre- and post-operative WHODAS 2.0 scores.
resultsNo differences were seen between the two groups in preoperative disability (p = 0.25), ASA score (p = 0.46), or duration of surgery (p = 0.85). At 3 months 44% (176/401) of patients were available for telephone for postoperative evaluation. All had a significant reduction in their disability score from 8.4% to 1.0% (p < 0.001), 17 experienced a post-operative complication, but none had residual disability and there were no deaths. The group lost to follow-up were more likely to be female (65% versus 50%, p < 0.05), were younger (mean age 31 versus 35, p < 0.05), had longer hospital stays (10 versus 4 days, p < 0.001), and were more likely to have experienced post-operative complications (p < 0.05).
conclusionThis study demonstrates that surgical intervention in a LMIC decreases patient reported disability as measured by WHODAS 2.0.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.