Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34059081›Full record

ReviewHealth and quality of life outcomes2021

Exploring what is important to patients with regards to quality of life after experiencing a lower limb reconstructive procedure: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

H Leggett, A Scantlebury, A Byrne, M Harden, C Hewitt, G O'Carroll, H Sharma, C McDaid, PROLLIT study collaborators

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. What is important to adults after lower limb reconstruction surgery: a conceptual framework.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Article
  4. LIMB-Q Kids-German Translation and Cultural Adaptation.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

H LeggettYork Trials Unit, The University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK. heather.leggett@leeds.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8708-9842
A ScantleburyYork Trials Unit, The University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
A ByrneYork Trials Unit, The University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
M HardenCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, The University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
C HewittYork Trials Unit, The University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
G O'CarrollYork Trials Unit, The University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
H SharmaHull University Teaching Hospitals, Hull, HU3 2JZ, UK.
C McDaidYork Trials Unit, The University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
PROLLIT study collaborators
University of York · GBUniversity of Hull · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to understand the impact of lower limb reconstruction surgery on patients' quality of life (QOL). Existing measures have not been developed to specifically capture patient experiences amongst adults with lower limb conditions that require reconstruction surgery. This review aimed to synthesise qualitative evidence to identify what is important to patients requiring, undergoing, or following reconstructive surgery for lower limb conditions.

methodsMEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO and Cinahl were searched from inception until November 2020. Studies were included if they employed qualitative research methods, involved patients requiring, undergoing or following lower limb reconstruction and explored patients' experiences of care, treatment, recovery and QOL. Mixed methods studies that did not separately report qualitative findings, mixed population studies that were not separately reported and studies in languages other than English were excluded. Included studies were analysed using thematic synthesis. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative studies checklist was used to undertake quality assessment.

resultsNine studies met the inclusion criteria. The thematic synthesis identified two overarching themes: (1) areas of living key to QOL for lower limb reconstruction patients and (2) moving towards a new normal. The way in which lower limb reconstruction affects an individual's QOL and their recovery is complex and is influenced by a range of inter-related factors, which will affect patients to varying degrees depending on their individual circumstances. We identified these factors as: pain, daily functioning and lifestyle, identity, income, emotional wellbeing, support, the ability to adapt and adjust and the ability to move forwards.

conclusionsThe way patients' QOL is affected after a lower limb reconstruction is complex, may change over time and is strongly linked to their recovery. These findings will aid us in developing a conceptual framework which identifies the outcomes important to patients and those that should be included in a PROM. Further research is then required to establish whether the range of factors we identified are captured by existing PROMs. Depending on the outcome of this work, a new PROM for patients following lower limb reconstruction may be required.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLower ExtremityMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPlastic Surgery ProceduresQualitative ResearchQuality of LifeLower limb reconstructionPatient reported outcome measuresQualitative evidence synthesisQuality of lifeThematic synthesis

Identifiers

PMID34059081
PMCPMC8166062
OpenAlexW3164670428

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.