» Articles » PMID: 35430086

Measurement of Quality of Recovery After Surgery Using the 15-item Quality of Recovery Scale: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Overview
Journal Br J Anaesth
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Anesthesiology
Date 2022 Apr 17
PMID 35430086
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: There are very few patient-centred global outcome measures of recovery in the days or weeks after surgery. This meta-analysis evaluated the psychometric properties and clinical acceptability of the 15-item quality of recovery (QoR-15) scale.

Methods: We searched bibliographic databases for studies undertaking psychometric evaluation of the QoR-15 or using the QoR-15 as an outcome measure after surgery. Record screening, data extraction, and quality assessments were independently done by two researchers. Weighted averages estimating overall summary statistics across all the studies were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. Pooled correlation coefficients were transformed using a Fisher z-transformation and then back-transformed to calculate pooled results. The four co-primary endpoints were validity, reliability, responsiveness, and clinical utility of the QoR-15 scale.

Results: A total of 26 unique studies met the eligibility criteria, yielding up to 22 847 patients across 16 countries, in 15 languages. A further 172 studies in a further 18 countries and six languages used the QoR-15 as an outcome measure. The QoR-15 had excellent discriminant validity, with the mean difference in QoR-15 scores in patients with and without postoperative complications (9.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.9-13.3; P<0.001), and good convergent validity (for a global visual analogue recovery scale, pooled r=0.63; 95% CI, 0.54-0.71). There was excellent reliability: internal consistency (pooled α=0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.87), split-half reliability=0.80 (95% CI, 0.75-0.84), and test-retest reliability=0.97 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98). There was also high responsiveness (pooled standardised response mean=0.87; 95% CI, 0.65-1.08), patient recruitment into evaluation studies (96%; 95% CI, 93-99), and excellent completion and return rates (91%; 95% CI, 84-96). The mean time to complete the QoR-15 was 2.7 (95% CI, 2.2-3.1) min.

Conclusions: The QoR-15 is a valid, reliable, and responsive patient-centred outcome metric in surgical patients. It is highly acceptable to both patients and clinicians.

Registration: Open Science Framework Identifier: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/78HTA.

Citing Articles

Buccal Acupuncture Alleviates Postoperative Pain in Patients Undergoing Radical Resection of Gastrointestinal Cancers: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.

Zhu Z, Chen C, Zheng Y, Gong W, Chen Z, Fang S Chin J Integr Med. 2025; .

PMID: 40080251 DOI: 10.1007/s11655-025-4128-y.


Effects of Deep Sedation With Dexmedetomidine Versus Remifentanil on Postoperative Recovery in Soft Tissue Surgery.

Kishman A, Sholjakova M, Kartalov A, Kuzmanovska B, Lleshi A, Jovanovski Srceva M Cureus. 2025; 17(2):e79820.

PMID: 40028433 PMC: 11869932. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.79820.


Comparison of remimazolam-based and propofol-based general anaesthesia on postoperative quality of recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: protocol for a prospective, randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial.

An D, Wang J, Ren C, Zhao Y, Wei C, Wu A BMJ Open. 2025; 15(2):e093144.

PMID: 40010808 PMC: 11865783. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093144.


Effects of Ciprofol and Propofol General Anesthesia on Postoperative Recovery Quality in Patients Undergoing Ureteroscopy: A Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blind Clinical Trial.

Shi S, Wu J, Wu Y, Han X, Dai H, Chen X Drug Des Devel Ther. 2025; 19:931-943.

PMID: 39959121 PMC: 11829596. DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S497554.


Effect of combination of remimazolam and sevoflurane on elderly patients' recovery quality from general anesthesia after laparoscopic abdominal surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

Lai X, Liu S, Wang D, Chi Y, Su X, Guo L Perioper Med (Lond). 2025; 14(1):20.

PMID: 39948637 PMC: 11823161. DOI: 10.1186/s13741-025-00501-3.