Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 7/2015

01.07.2015 | Trauma Surgery

Patient-reported outcome assessment after total joint replacement: comparison of questionnaire completion times on paper and tablet computer

verfasst von: N. Kesterke, J. Egeter, J. B. Erhardt, B. Jost, K. Giesinger

Erschienen in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Ausgabe 7/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment is becoming increasingly important after joint replacement surgery. However, PRO data collection, questionnaire handling, and data processing are time consuming and costly process. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficiency of PRO assessment using tablet computers compared with traditional paper questionnaires in a total hip or knee arthroplasty (THR or TKR) population.

Materials and methods

We recruited 100 patients from outpatient clinics attending for routine follow-up 2 months, 1 year, or 5 years after THR or TKR. Fifty patients completed the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis score and Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) questionnaires on paper, and 50 patients completed these on a tablet computer. Questionnaire completion was timed for each PRO assessment and for manual data entry of the paper questionnaires into the database. The t test, Mann–Whitney U test, Fisher’s exact test, and Wilcoxon test were used for statistical analysis.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 67.0 years (standard deviation 10.3 years), with no significant difference between the two groups. Median time for WOMAC questionnaire completion (including data entry for the paper questionnaires) was 197 s for the paper version and 117 s for the tablet version (p < 0.001). Median times for completion of FJS-12 were comparable for paper and tablet versions (32 vs. 37 s). We did not find a significant correlation between age and time for questionnaire completion.

Conclusion

Electronic PRO data collection can substantially decrease time, logistics, and effort associated with questionnaire completion in daily clinical practice. It is also acceptable for use in an older arthroplasty population.
Literatur
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Rogausch A et al (2009) Feasibility and acceptance of electronic quality of life assessment in general practice: an implementation study. Health Qual Life Outcomes 7:51PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Rogausch A et al (2009) Feasibility and acceptance of electronic quality of life assessment in general practice: an implementation study. Health Qual Life Outcomes 7:51PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Crane HM et al (2007) Routine collection of patient-reported outcomes in an HIV clinic setting: the first 100 patients. Curr HIV Res 5(1):109–118PubMedCrossRef Crane HM et al (2007) Routine collection of patient-reported outcomes in an HIV clinic setting: the first 100 patients. Curr HIV Res 5(1):109–118PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Kinnaman JE, Farrell AD, Bisconer SW (2006) Evaluation of the computerized assessment system for psychotherapy evaluation and research (CASPER) as a measure of treatment effectiveness with psychiatric inpatients. Assessment 13(2):154–167PubMedCrossRef Kinnaman JE, Farrell AD, Bisconer SW (2006) Evaluation of the computerized assessment system for psychotherapy evaluation and research (CASPER) as a measure of treatment effectiveness with psychiatric inpatients. Assessment 13(2):154–167PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Velikova G et al (1999) Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires. J Clin Oncol 17(3):998–1007PubMed Velikova G et al (1999) Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires. J Clin Oncol 17(3):998–1007PubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Taenzer PA et al (1997) Computerized quality-of-life screening in an oncology clinic. Cancer Pract 5(3):168–175PubMed Taenzer PA et al (1997) Computerized quality-of-life screening in an oncology clinic. Cancer Pract 5(3):168–175PubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Theiler R et al (2004) Responsiveness of the electronic touch screen WOMAC 3.1 OA Index in a short term clinical trial with rofecoxib. Osteoarthr Cartil OARS Osteoarthr Res Soc 12(11):912–916CrossRef Theiler R et al (2004) Responsiveness of the electronic touch screen WOMAC 3.1 OA Index in a short term clinical trial with rofecoxib. Osteoarthr Cartil OARS Osteoarthr Res Soc 12(11):912–916CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Lundy JJ, Coons SJ, Aaronson NK (2014) Testing the measurement equivalence of paper and interactive voice response system versions of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res 23(1):229–237PubMedCrossRef Lundy JJ, Coons SJ, Aaronson NK (2014) Testing the measurement equivalence of paper and interactive voice response system versions of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res 23(1):229–237PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Clayton JA et al (2013) Web-based versus paper administration of common ophthalmic questionnaires: comparison of subscale scores. Ophthalmology 120(10):2151–2159PubMedCrossRef Clayton JA et al (2013) Web-based versus paper administration of common ophthalmic questionnaires: comparison of subscale scores. Ophthalmology 120(10):2151–2159PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Bjorner JB et al (2014) Difference in method of administration did not significantly impact item response: an IRT-based analysis from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) initiative. Qual Life Res 23(1):217–227PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Bjorner JB et al (2014) Difference in method of administration did not significantly impact item response: an IRT-based analysis from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) initiative. Qual Life Res 23(1):217–227PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Coons SJ et al (2009) Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health 12(4):419–429PubMedCrossRef Coons SJ et al (2009) Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health 12(4):419–429PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Holzner B et al (2012) The Computer-based Health Evaluation Software (CHES): a software for electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 12:126PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Holzner B et al (2012) The Computer-based Health Evaluation Software (CHES): a software for electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 12:126PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Bellamy N et al (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15(12):1833–1840PubMed Bellamy N et al (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15(12):1833–1840PubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Bischoff-Ferrari HA et al (2005) Validation and patient acceptance of a computer touch screen version of the WOMAC 3.1 osteoarthritis index. Ann Rheum Dis 64(1):80–84PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Bischoff-Ferrari HA et al (2005) Validation and patient acceptance of a computer touch screen version of the WOMAC 3.1 osteoarthritis index. Ann Rheum Dis 64(1):80–84PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Behrend H et al (2012) The “forgotten joint” as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure. J Arthroplasty 27(3): 430–436 e1 Behrend H et al (2012) The “forgotten joint” as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure. J Arthroplasty 27(3): 430–436 e1
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Thienpont E et al (2014) Joint awareness in different types of knee arthroplasty evaluated with the forgotten joint score. J Arthroplasty 29(1):48–51PubMedCrossRef Thienpont E et al (2014) Joint awareness in different types of knee arthroplasty evaluated with the forgotten joint score. J Arthroplasty 29(1):48–51PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Nagle S, Schmidt L (2012) Computer acceptance of older adults. Work 41(Suppl 1):3541–3548PubMed Nagle S, Schmidt L (2012) Computer acceptance of older adults. Work 41(Suppl 1):3541–3548PubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Buxton J, White M, Osoba D (1998) Patients’ experiences using a computerized program with a touch-sensitive video monitor for the assessment of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res 7(6):513–519PubMedCrossRef Buxton J, White M, Osoba D (1998) Patients’ experiences using a computerized program with a touch-sensitive video monitor for the assessment of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res 7(6):513–519PubMedCrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Erharter A et al (2010) Implementation of computer-based quality-of-life monitoring in brain tumor outpatients in routine clinical practice. J Pain Symptom Manage 39(2):219–229PubMedCrossRef Erharter A et al (2010) Implementation of computer-based quality-of-life monitoring in brain tumor outpatients in routine clinical practice. J Pain Symptom Manage 39(2):219–229PubMedCrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Velikova G et al (2004) Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 22(4):714–724PubMedCrossRef Velikova G et al (2004) Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 22(4):714–724PubMedCrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Bellamy N et al (2010) Electronic data capture using the Womac NRS 3.1 Index (m-Womac): a pilot study of repeated independent remote data capture in OA. Inflammopharmacology 18(3):107–111PubMedCrossRef Bellamy N et al (2010) Electronic data capture using the Womac NRS 3.1 Index (m-Womac): a pilot study of repeated independent remote data capture in OA. Inflammopharmacology 18(3):107–111PubMedCrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Berry DL et al (2011) Enhancing patient-provider communication with the electronic self-report assessment for cancer: a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 29(8):1029–1035PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Berry DL et al (2011) Enhancing patient-provider communication with the electronic self-report assessment for cancer: a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 29(8):1029–1035PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Hilarius DL et al (2008) Use of health-related quality-of-life assessments in daily clinical oncology nursing practice: a community hospital-based intervention study. Cancer 113(3):628–637PubMedCrossRef Hilarius DL et al (2008) Use of health-related quality-of-life assessments in daily clinical oncology nursing practice: a community hospital-based intervention study. Cancer 113(3):628–637PubMedCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Roberts N, Bradley B, Williams D (2014) Use of SMS and tablet computer improves the electronic collection of elective orthopaedic patient reported outcome measures. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 96(5):348–351PubMedCrossRef Roberts N, Bradley B, Williams D (2014) Use of SMS and tablet computer improves the electronic collection of elective orthopaedic patient reported outcome measures. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 96(5):348–351PubMedCrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Bellamy N et al (2011) Osteoarthritis Index delivered by mobile phone (m-WOMAC) is valid, reliable, and responsive. J Clin Epidemiol 64(2):182–190PubMedCrossRef Bellamy N et al (2011) Osteoarthritis Index delivered by mobile phone (m-WOMAC) is valid, reliable, and responsive. J Clin Epidemiol 64(2):182–190PubMedCrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Andikyan V et al (2012) A prospective study of the feasibility and acceptability of a Web-based, electronic patient-reported outcome system in assessing patient recovery after major gynecologic cancer surgery. Gynecol Oncol 127(2):273–277PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Andikyan V et al (2012) A prospective study of the feasibility and acceptability of a Web-based, electronic patient-reported outcome system in assessing patient recovery after major gynecologic cancer surgery. Gynecol Oncol 127(2):273–277PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat de Bree R et al (2008) Touch screen computer-assisted health-related quality of life and distress data collection in head and neck cancer patients. Clin Otolaryngol 33(2):138–142PubMedCrossRef de Bree R et al (2008) Touch screen computer-assisted health-related quality of life and distress data collection in head and neck cancer patients. Clin Otolaryngol 33(2):138–142PubMedCrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Blum D et al (2014) Feasibility and acceptance of electronic monitoring of symptoms and syndromes using a handheld computer in patients with advanced cancer in daily oncology practice. Support Care Cancer 22(9):2425–2434PubMedCrossRef Blum D et al (2014) Feasibility and acceptance of electronic monitoring of symptoms and syndromes using a handheld computer in patients with advanced cancer in daily oncology practice. Support Care Cancer 22(9):2425–2434PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Patient-reported outcome assessment after total joint replacement: comparison of questionnaire completion times on paper and tablet computer
verfasst von
N. Kesterke
J. Egeter
J. B. Erhardt
B. Jost
K. Giesinger
Publikationsdatum
01.07.2015
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Ausgabe 7/2015
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Elektronische ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-015-2222-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2015

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 7/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. 
» Jetzt entdecken

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.