An Updated Minimal Clinically Important Difference for the QoR-15 Scale

Myles, Paul S.; Myles, Daniel B.

doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000003977

Cited by 64 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous study revealed the minimal clinically important difference of global QoR-15 scores was 8, but the authors updated it to be 6 lately. 30 The paper was formally published in November 2021, when data collection of our study was already finished. Even with this updated value, our sample size was enough to reach a power of 80% with a type 1 error of 0.05, and our data still revealed a statistical and clinical difference in total QoR-15 scores at POD1 between the two groups, while difference between the two groups at POD3 only had statistical but not clinical important significance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of Recovery After General Anesthesia with Remimazolam in Patients’ Undergoing Urologic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Remimazolam with Propofol

Mao¹,

Guo²,

Yuan³

et al. 2022

DDDT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of Recovery After General Anesthesia with Remimazolam in Patients’ Undergoing Urologic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Remimazolam with Propofol

Mao¹,

Guo²,

Yuan³

et al. 2022

DDDT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Compared to QoR-40, QoR-15 has the same psychometric properties but is more feasible to use ( 28 ). QoR-15 is a validated quality assessment tool that can evaluate the efficacy of the post-surgical intervention on QoR-15 from a patient’s perspective ( 36 ). Meanwhile, postoperative pain remains a challenge for breast surgery patients ( 37 ); strategies to limit pain are increasingly being elaborated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Ultrasound-Guided Deep Serratus Anterior Plane Block Combined With Dexmedetomidine as an Adjuvant to Ropivacaine Inpatient Quality of Recovery Scores Undergoing Modified Radical Mastectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Kang

et al. 2022

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundBreast cancer has overtaken lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed malignancy and is the leading cause of cancer-related death in women. Surgery is the only possible cure for breast cancer, and the incidence of acute postoperative pain (APP) is high in breast surgery. Previous reports suggested that ultrasound-guided deep serratus anterior plane block (dSAPB) provided effective blockade to relieve pain after modified radical mastectomy for breast cancer. In fact, despite the long-acting local anesthetic agents used, the patient’s pain cannot completely be eliminated due to the short duration of anesthesia. Dexmedetomidine as an adjunct to local anesthetics can prolong peripheral nerve block duration. However, no study has investigated the role of dSAPB with dexmedetomidine in the quality of recovery scores undergoing modified radical mastectomy. Thus, this study was conducted aiming at this aspect.Material and MethodsThis single-center, double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted at Bethune International Peace Hospital. A total of 88 participants of elective modified radical mastectomy were enrolled from May and November 2021. Ultrasound-guided dSAPB combined with 30 ml of 0.375% ropivacaine or 30 ml of 0.375% ropivacaine with dexmedetomidine (1 μg/kg) was administrated before anesthesia at the fourth to fifth ribs of the axillary midline. The primary outcome was quality of recovery, measured 24 h postoperatively using the QoR-15. Secondary outcomes were the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores at rest and movement at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after surgery, 48 h sufentanil consumption postoperatively, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), length of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, dizziness, delirium, SAPB-related adverse events, and patient’s satisfaction with pain management.ResultsAmong the 88 participants, 8 did not meet the inclusion criteria; the other 80 were randomized to receive dSAPB combined with ropivacaine (Group R, N=40) and dSAPB combined with ropivacaine plus DEX (Group RD, N=40), of which a total of 7 (4 in Group R and 3 in Group RD) were excluded due to protocol deviation. Eventually,73 participants (36 in Group R and 37 in Group RD) were included for final analysis, with age (SD, years, 54.08[6.28] vs. 54.62[7.44], p=0.740), body mass index (BMI) (SD, 27.96[1.67] vs. 27.57[2.38], p=0.428), and median preoperative global QoR-15 score (interquartile range (IQR), 127[123.25–131] vs. 126[121–130], p=0.662). The median postoperative global QoR-15 score (IQR, 107[103–112] vs. 109.5[107–114], p=0.016), VAS score at rest at 12th hour (IQR, 1[1–2] vs. 1[1–2], p=0.033), VAS score in movement at 12th hour (IQR, 2[1–3] vs. 2[1–3], p=0.014) and at 24th hour (IQR, 3[2–3] vs. 3[2–3], p=0.040), and median sufentanil rescues consumption (IQR, 14[12–17 vs. 14[12–15], p=0.022] of Group RD were significantly lower than those of the Group R. Patient satisfaction score (SD, 8.28[0.70] vs. 8.62[0.59], p=0.024) of Group RD were significantly higher than those of the Group R.ConclusionThe ultrasound-guided dSAPB combined with dexmedetomidine plus ropivacaine may improve the QoR-15 in patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy and indicates that it may be a useful intervention to aid recovery following breast cancer surgery. Furthermore, participants in the ropivacaine with DEX group met the superior pain relief in the early postoperative period, reduced postoperative cumulative opioid consumption, increased patient satisfaction, and no increase in the incidence of complications.

show abstract

“…Currently, the QoR-15 is strongly recommended as a standard outcome measure of QoR in clinical research relating to surgery and anesthesia [ 9 ]. Perioperative interventions that result in a change in QoR-15 score of 6 signify a clinically important improvement or deterioration [ 10 , 12 ]. Furthermore, it could be a useful outcome measure for assessing the impact of healthcare delivery changes for quality assurance purposes [ 1 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the Dutch translation of the quality of recovery-15 scale

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The 15-item Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scale is strongly recommended as a standard patient-reported outcome measure assessing the quality of recovery after surgery and anesthesia in the postoperative period. This study aimed to validate the Dutch translation of the questionnaire (QoR-15NL). Materials and methods An observational, prospective, single-centre cohort study was conducted. Patients who underwent surgery under general anesthesia completed the QoR-15NL (preoperatively (t1) and twice postoperatively (t2 and t3)) and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for general recovery at t2. A psychometric evaluation was performed to assess the QoR-15NL’s validity, reliability, responsiveness, reproducibility and feasibility. Results Two hundred and eleven patients agreed to participate (recruitment rate 94%), and 165 patients were included (completion rate 78%). The QoR-15NL score correlated with the VAS for general recovery (rs = 0.59). Construct validity was further demonstrated by confirmation of expected negative associations between the QoR-15NL and duration of surgery (rs = -0.25), duration of Post Anesthesia Care Unit stay (rs = -0.31), and duration of hospital stay (rs = -0.27). The QoR-15NL score decreased significantly according to the extent of surgery. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.87, split-half reliability was 0.8, and the test–retest intra-class coefficient was 0.93. No significant floor- or ceiling effect was observed. Conclusion The QoR-15NL scale is a valid, easy-to-use, and reliable outcome assessment tool with high responsiveness for patient-reported quality of recovery after surgery and general anesthesia in the Dutch-speaking population. The QoR-15NL’s measurement properties are comparable to the original questionnaire and other translated versions. Trial registration not applicable.

show abstract

An Updated Minimal Clinically Important Difference for the QoR-15 Scale

Cited by 64 publications

References 14 publications

Quality of Recovery After General Anesthesia with Remimazolam in Patients’ Undergoing Urologic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Remimazolam with Propofol

Quality of Recovery After General Anesthesia with Remimazolam in Patients’ Undergoing Urologic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Remimazolam with Propofol

Impact of Ultrasound-Guided Deep Serratus Anterior Plane Block Combined With Dexmedetomidine as an Adjuvant to Ropivacaine Inpatient Quality of Recovery Scores Undergoing Modified Radical Mastectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Validation of the Dutch translation of the quality of recovery-15 scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About