The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement assembled an international working group of venous thromboembolism experts and patient representatives to develop a standardised minimum... Show moreThe International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement assembled an international working group of venous thromboembolism experts and patient representatives to develop a standardised minimum set of outcomes and outcome measurements for integration into clinical practice and potentially research to support clinical decision making and benchmarking of quality of care. 15 core outcomes important to patients and health-care professionals were selected and categorised into four domains: patient-reported outcomes, long term consequences of the disease, disease-specific complications, and treatment-related complications. The outcomes and outcome measures were designed to apply to all patients with venous thromboembolism aged 16 years or older. A measurement tool package was selected for inclusion in the core standard set, with a minimum number of items to be measured at predefined timepoints, which capture all core outcomes. Additional measures can be introduced to the user by a cascade opt-in system that allows for further assessment if required. This set of outcomes and measurement tools will facilitate the implementation of the use of patient-centred outcomes in daily practice. Show less
Introduction: We recently proposed a scale for assessment of patient-relevant functional limitations following an episode of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Further development of this post-VTE... Show moreIntroduction: We recently proposed a scale for assessment of patient-relevant functional limitations following an episode of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Further development of this post-VTE functional status (PVFS) scale is still needed.Methods: Guided by the input of VTE experts and patients, we refined the PVFS scale and its accompanying manual, and attempted to acquire broad consensus on its use.Results: A Delphi analysis was performed involving 53 international VTE experts with diverse scientific and clinical backgrounds. In this process, the number of scale grades of the originally proposed PVFS scale was reduced and descriptions of the grades were improved. After these changes, a consensus was reached on the number/definitions of the grades, and method/timing of the scale assessment. The relevance and potential impact of the scale was confirmed in three focus groups totaling 18 VTE patients, who suggested additional changes to the manual, but not to the scale itself. Using the improved manual, the.-statistics between PVFS scale self-reporting and its assessment via the structured interview was 0.75 (95%CI 0.58-1.0), and 1.0 (95%CI 0.83-1.0) between independent raters of the recorded interview of 16 focus groups members.Conclusion: We improved the PVFS scale and demonstrated broad consensus on its relevance, optimal grades, and methods of assessing among international VTE experts and patients. The interobserver agreement of scale grade assignment was shown to be good-to-excellent. The PVFS scale may become an important outcome measure of functional impairment for quality of patient care and in future VTE trials. Show less
