SynthesisAnaesthesia2026
Measuring patient disability in the peri-operative period using the WHODAS 2.0 questionnaire: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Anaesthesia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is recommended by peri-operative core outcome sets as a measure of disability. Despite its growing use, the effect of different surgical procedures on disability measured by WHODAS 2.0 remains poorly understood and heterogeneous reporting across studies limits direct comparison.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review to assess the effect of different surgical procedures on disability measured by WHODAS 2.0, and the reporting of disability endpoints in peri-operative medicine. The primary outcome was the difference in WHODAS 2.0 summary score before and after surgery. Disability scores were calculated as a metric between 0% (no disability) and 100% (complete disability).
resultsThirty-nine studies were included. Pre-operative disability ranged from 2% to 61%. In 21 studies, disability increased by 1% to 17% within 3 months of surgery, with little change between 6 and 12 months (0% to -2%). Studies of orthopaedic surgery generally reported high pre-operative disability (> 35%) but also reductions in disability (10-37% reduction) within 3 months of surgery. In contrast, studies evaluating cancer surgery (n = 12) generally reported lower pre-operative disability (< 20%) but small increases (1-8%) within 3 months of surgery. Cardiovascular surgical studies displayed pre-operative disability between 4% and 17% with a difference in disability of -8% to +3% 3 months after surgery. Three different thresholds to define disability and 13 different WHODAS 2.0 endpoints were used, measured at eight different time-points after surgery. DISCUSSION: The effect of surgical procedures on postoperative disability as measured by WHODAS 2.0 is influenced by the type of surgery. Orthopaedic surgery may decrease disability, whereas cancer surgery may be associated with persistent increases. Standardised reporting of disability endpoints is needed to enhance the quality and comparability of future studies using 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.