A Systematic Review of Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment Instruments for Cancer Patients: A Malaysian Perspective Introduction The absence of a review of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessment tools has led to inconsistencies in the use of HRQoL instruments across different cancer populations, such as adults, pediatric patients, and caregivers, limiting the comparability of findings and hindering the accurate evaluation of cancer care outcomes. With that, this study aimed to investigate how Malaysian cancer patients’ and other sub-population’s HRQoL is measured and quantified through HRQoL assessment instrument. Methods From 2013 to 2023, a literature search was conducted on Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The included studies and previously published review papers were also cited backward. For each HRQoL assessment instrument, attributes such as author(s), year of publication, study site, study design, target population, cancer types, study purpose, sample size, and instrument languages were extracted and compared. Results In this systematic review encompassing 88 studies, a variety of HRQoL assessment tools were employed, including both generic and cancer-type specific instruments. Distinct HRQoL assessment tools were identified for different populations, including pediatric, adolescent, and caregiver groups. The findings underscore the wide variety of instruments used across different cancer populations and age groups, highlighting the need for tailored assessments that consider specific demographic and clinical contexts. While generic HRQoL tools were the most commonly used across studies, disease-specific instruments for various cancer types were also frequently employed as supplementary measures. Conclusion Moving forward, it is essential for stakeholders to collaborate in addressing the gaps in HRQoL research and to work towards the standardization of HRQoL assessment tools to ensure consistency and comparability in future studies.

Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 199 patients with surgically treated thoracolumbar fractures operated between January 2007 and January 2018. The potential risk factors for the development of AEs as well as the development of common complications were evaluated by univariate analysis, and a multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors predictive of the above. Results: The overall rate of AEs was 46.7%; 83 patients (41.7%) had nonsurgical AEs, whereas 24 (12.1%) had surgical adverse events. The most common AEs were urinary tract infections in 43 patients (21.6%), and hospital-acquired pneumonia in 21 patients (10.6%). On multivariate logistic regression, a Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity (TLICS) score of 8–10 (odds ratio [OR], 6.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.33–17.51), the presence of polytrauma (OR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.17–5.99), and undergoing open surgery (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.09–4.88) were significant risk factors for AEs. The absence of neurological deficit was associated with a lower rate of AEs (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31–0.70). Conclusions This study suggests the presence of polytrauma, preoperative American Spinal Injury Association score, and TLICS score are predictive of AEs in patients with surgically treated thoracolumbar fractures. The results might also suggest a role for minimally invasive surgical methods in reducing AEs in these patients.