Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29703195›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2018

Measurement of patient reported disability using WHODAS 2.0 before and after surgical intervention in Madagascar.

Michelle C White, Kirsten Randall, Dennis Alcorn, Rachel Greenland, Christine Glasgo, Mark G Shrime

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Michelle C WhiteMercy Ships, Department of Medical Capacity Building, Port of Toamasina, Toamasina, Madagascar. doctormcw@gmail.com.
Kirsten RandallMercy Ships, Department of Medical Capacity Building, Port of Toamasina, Toamasina, Madagascar.
Dennis AlcornMercy Ships, Department of Medical Capacity Building, Port of Toamasina, Toamasina, Madagascar.
Rachel GreenlandMercy Ships, Department of Medical Capacity Building, Port of Toamasina, Toamasina, Madagascar.
Christine GlasgoMercy Ships, Department of Medical Capacity Building, Port of Toamasina, Toamasina, Madagascar.
Mark G ShrimeMercy Ships, Department of Medical Capacity Building, Port of Toamasina, Toamasina, Madagascar.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Disability EvaluationAdultDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansMadagascarMaleMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPatient SatisfactionPersons with DisabilitiesPostoperative ComplicationsQuality of Health CareSurgical Procedures, OperativeTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultGlobal surgeryHealth systems evaluationSurgical outcomes evaluation

Identifiers

PMID29703195
PMCPMC5923000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.