Publications by authors named "Chindhu Shunmuga Sundaram"

4 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

A systematic review of body image measures for people diagnosed with head and neck cancer (HNC).

Support Care Cancer 2019 Oct 15;27(10):3657-3666. Epub 2019 Jun 15.

Quality of Life Office, School of Psychology, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Purpose: Head and neck cancer (HNC) is a relatively common cancer which causes a significant health burden, impacting individuals physically and psychologically. HNC treatment may result in facial disfigurement, eating and communication difficulties, and body image disturbances. We aimed to (1) identify HNC-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess body image, (2) evaluate their conceptual coverage, (3) appraise their development process and psychometric properties, and (4) determine appropriate body image PROM(s) for use in the HNC setting.

Methods: Online databases were searched (July 2007-July 2017) for studies that assessed body image in patients with HNC. Studies were screened for eligibility. In addition, we searched three PROM databases for relevant PROMs. From available body image frameworks, we compiled a conceptual schema consisting of 18 clinically relevant body image issues important in the HNC setting, against which PROMs were assessed. Selected measures were appraised for psychometric characteristics, content, and readability.

Results: A total of 245 records were retrieved. 18 studies with PROMs met our inclusion criteria, reporting eight PROMs. The PROM databases searched yielded 62 measures. After screening, eleven measures were short-listed and appraised. The Derriford Appearance Scale (DAS)-59, DAS-24, and body image scale (BIS) cover > 55% of issues within the body image conceptual schema; were developed based on literature, patient interviews, and clinician opinions; and have evidence of internal consistency (Cronbach alpha > 0.7), validity, and responsiveness.

Conclusions: We recommend the DAS-24 and BIS as having adequate coverage of HNC-related issues, and suitable for use in future research.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-04919-6DOI Listing
October 2019

Trials with proxy-reported outcomes registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR).

Qual Life Res 2019 Apr 15;28(4):955-962. Epub 2018 Dec 15.

Department of Health Services, Policy & Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, USA.

Aims: A proxy is someone other than a patient who reports a patient's outcomes as if they are the patient. Due to known discordance with patient reports, proxies are often not recommended in clinical trials; however, proxies may be needed in certain research contexts. We aimed to identify and describe trials registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) with proxy-reported endpoints.

Methods: ANZCTR was systematically searched from inception (2005) to 31 March 2017 for trials with proxy-reported endpoints. Primary and secondary endpoints for each trial retrieved by the search were individually coded (proxy-reported: yes/no), and trials with confirmed proxy-reported endpoints were included in the analysis.

Results: Of 13,666 registered trials, 469 (3.4%) included a proxy-reported endpoint (867 individual proxy-reported endpoints in total: 62% family member proxy, 22% health professional). Proxy endpoint inclusion did not significantly increase over time (r = 0.18, p = 0.59). Mental health (11.5%), stroke (10.3%) and neurological (8.3%) trials had the highest proportion of trials using proxies. Of the 469 trials, 123 (26.2%) studies involved paediatric patients.

Discussion: Proxy-reported endpoints are included in a small but notable number of studies, which may indicate other types of outcomes are used for patients unable to self-report, or that these patients are under-researched.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-2080-4DOI Listing
April 2019

Correction to: Trials with patient-reported outcomes registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR).

Qual Life Res 2018 10;27(10):2593

Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICEc) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

In the original publication of the article, the sentence "The ANZCTR is the fifth largest trial registry internationally, with 21,330 registered trials as at January 2018 [5]" in the Introduction section was published incorrectly.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1934-0DOI Listing
October 2018

Trials with patient-reported outcomes registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR).

Qual Life Res 2018 Oct 18;27(10):2581-2591. Epub 2018 Jun 18.

Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICEc) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Aims: It is important to understand the number, types and regions of trials that include patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to appreciate how patient experiences have been considered in studies of health and interventions. Twenty-seven percent of trials registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (2007-2013) included PROs; however, a regional breakdown was not provided and no reviews have been conducted of the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR). We aimed to identify trials registered with ANZCTR with PRO endpoints and describe their characteristics.

Methods: ANZCTR was systematically searched from inception (2005) to 31 March 2017 for trials with PRO endpoints. Search terms included PRO measures listed in Patient-Reported Outcomes Quality of Life Instrument Database and Grid-Enabled Measures, as well as generic PRO terms (e.g. "quality of life" (QOL)). Trial endpoints were individually coded using an established framework to identify trials with PROs for the analysis.

Results: Of 13,666 registered trials, 6168 (45.1%) included a PRO. The proportion of studies including PROs increased between 2006 and 2016 (r = 0.74, p = 0.009). Among the 6168 trials, there were 17,961 individual PRO endpoints, including symptoms/functional outcomes/condition-specific QOL (65.6%), generic QOL (13.2%), patient-reported experiences (9.9%), patient-reported behaviours (7.9%). Mental health was the most common category (99.8% included PROs), followed by physical medicine/rehabilitation (65.6%), musculoskeletal (63.5%), public health (63.1%), and cancer (54.2%).

Discussion: Our findings suggest growing use of PROs in the assessment of health and interventions in ANZ. Our review identifies trial categories with limited patient-reported information and provides a basis for future work on the impact of PRO findings in clinical care.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1921-5DOI Listing
October 2018
-->