Vývoj dotazníku pro zhodnocení výsledku rekonstrukce nosu pacientem

Stáhnout PDF

Autoři: Dvořák- Z. ^{1 3}; Křenková V. ²; Hudcová L. ⁴; Knoz M. ^1,2; Kubát M. ^1,2; Pink R. ^3,5
Působiště autorů: Department of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, St. Anne`s University Hospital, Brno, Czech Republic ¹; Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic ²; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital, Olomouc, Czech Republic ³; Faculty of Economics and Administration, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic ⁴; Faculty of Medicine, Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic ⁵
Vyšlo v časopise: ACTA CHIRURGIAE PLASTICAE, 64, 1, 2022, pp. 24-30
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/ccachp202224

Zdroje

1. Mureau MAM., Moolenburgh SE., Levendag PC., et al. Aesthetic and functional outcome following nasal reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007, 120(5): 1217–1227.

2. Dvořák Z., Novák P., Výška T., et al. Reconstruction of defects with forehead flap. Acta Chir Plast. 2015, 57(3–4): 46–48.

3. Dvořák Z., Heroutová M., Sukop A., et al. Příčina, diagnostika, klasifikace defektů nosu a historie rekonstrukce nosu. Otorinolaryngol Foniatr. 2018, 67(4): 95–99.

4. Dvořák Z., Kubek T., Pink R., et al. Moderní principy rekonstrukce nosu. Otorinolaryngol Foniatr. 2018, 67(4): 100–106.

5. Menick FJ. A 10-year experience in nasal reconstruction with the three-stage forehead flap. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002, 109(6): 1839–1855; discussion 1856–1861.

6. Baker SR. Principles of nasal reconstruction. Springer 2011.

7. Klassen AF., Cano SJ., Schwitzer JA., et al. FACE-Q scales for health-related quality of life, early life impact, satisfaction with outcomes, and decision to have treatment: development and validation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015, 135(2): 375–386.

8. Weldring T., Smith SMS. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Health Serv Insights. 2013, 6: 61–68.

9. Aaronson N., Alonso J., Burnam A., et al. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res. 2002, 11(3): 193–205.

10. Lasch KE., Marquis P., Vigneux M., et al. PRO development: rigorous qualitative research as the crucial foundation. Qual Life Res. 2010, 19(8): 1087–1096.

11. Patrick DL., Burke LB., Gwaltney CJ., et al. Content validity – establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1 – eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value Health. 2011, 14(8): 967–977.

12. Schwitzer JA., Sher SR., Fan KL., et al. Assessing patient-reported satisfaction with appearance and quality of life following rhinoplasty using the FACE-Q appraisal scales. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015, 135(5): 830e–837e.

13. Rothrock NE., Kaiser KA., Cella D. Developing a valid patient-reported outcome measure. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011, 90(5): 737–742.

14. Edwards P., Roberts I., Clarke M., et al. Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review. BMJ. 2002, 324(7347): 1183.