Patient-reported physical functioning and quality of life after pelvic ring injury: A systematic review of the literature

Abstract

Background Pelvic ring injuries are one of the most serious traumatic injuries with large consequences for the patients’ daily life. During recent years, the importance of the patients’ perception of their functioning and quality of life following injury has increasingly received attention. This systematic review reports on self-reported physical functioning and quality of life after all types of pelvic ring injuries. Methods The online databases MEDLINE-PubMed and Ovid-EMBASE were searched for studies published between 2008 and 2019 to identify published evidence of patient-reported physical functioning and quality of life after which they were assessed for their methodological quality. Results Of the 2577 articles, 46 were reviewed in full-text, including 3049 patients. Most studies were heterogeneous, with small cohorts of patients, a variety of injury types, treatment methods and use of different, often non-validated, outcome measures. The overall methodological quality was moderate to poor. Nine different PROMs were used, of which the Majeed Pelvic Score (MPS), SF-36 and EQ-5D were the most widely used. Mean scores respectively ranged from 75–95 (MPS), 53–69 (SF-36, physical functioning) and 0.63–0.80 (EQ-5D). Conclusions Physical functioning and quality of life following pelvic ring injuries seem fair and tend to improve during follow-up. However, differences in patient numbers, injury definition, treatment strategy, follow-up duration and type of PROMs used between studies hampers to elucidate the actual effects of pelvic ring injuries on a patient’s life. Implications of key findings Physicians and researchers should use valid and reliable patient-reported outcome instruments on large cohorts of patients with properly defined injuries to truly evaluate physical functioning and quality of life after pelvic ring injuries. Systematic review registration number PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews; registration number CRD42019129176.

Does 3D-Assisted Acetabular Fracture Surgery Improve Surgical Outcome and Physical Functioning?—A Systematic Review

“…Some studies used the Harris Hip score [30,38,46], whereas others used the Merle d'Aubigné score [31,32,34]. Both instruments are, however, not designed and validated for evaluating the functional outcome of acetabular fractures [51]. Comparing results between studies is difficult due to the limited number of studies reporting on the functional outcome and usage of different measurement methods.…”

Pelvic Girdle Pain, Hypermobility Spectrum Disorder and Hypermobility-Type Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome: A Narrative Literature Review

“…A further challenge we face when interpreting current literature on management of outcomes is related to the broad variety of PROMs used in studies, particularly global health measures such as the SF-36, ODI, EQ-5D and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment which are not disease-specific as well as limiting translation and comparison of study findings, particularly where identical questionnaires were reported on differently [ 113 , 114 ]. PROMs related to the pelvis exist, such as the Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire, Majeed, Iowa and Orlando scores [ 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 ].…”

“…For pregnancy-related PGP, we would advise the use of the Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire as it is well-validated as previously discussed. For other causes of PGP we advise the use of validated global measures such as the VAS, EQ-5D and SF-36 or ODI, which can be compared to population norms, as the application of pelvic-specific outcomes for this population require further assessment [ 114 , 128 , 129 ].…”

Does 3D-Assisted Operative Treatment of Pelvic Ring Injuries Improve Patient Outcome?—A Systematic Review of the Literature

“…We hypothesized that 3D assisted surgery could have an effect on these measures, which is the rationale to choose these outcome measures. Moreover, these are widely used for assessing pelvic ring surgery related to patient outcomes [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Except for case studies with N < 10 and conference abstracts, all study designs were accepted for inclusion.…”