リケラボ論文検索は、全国の大学リポジトリにある学位論文・教授論文を一括検索できる論文検索サービスです。

リケラボ 全国の大学リポジトリにある学位論文・教授論文を一括検索するならリケラボ論文検索大学・研究所にある論文を検索できる

リケラボ 全国の大学リポジトリにある学位論文・教授論文を一括検索するならリケラボ論文検索大学・研究所にある論文を検索できる

大学・研究所にある論文を検索できる 「Measurement of equivalence between the web and paper versions of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire」の論文概要。リケラボ論文検索は、全国の大学リポジトリにある学位論文・教授論文を一括検索できる論文検索サービスです。

コピーが完了しました

URLをコピーしました

論文の公開元へ論文の公開元へ
書き出し

Measurement of equivalence between the web and paper versions of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire

Takegami, Yasuhiko Seki, Taisuke Higuchi, Yoshitoshi Osawa, Yusuke Ishiguro, Naoki 名古屋大学

2020

概要

Objectives: Digitised patient-reported outcome may be beneficial for physicians and patients. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ) can only be completed with paper and pencil (pJHEQ). We newly developed a web version of the JHEQ (wJHEQ). This study aimed to determine whether the scores obtained with the wJHEQ are equivalent to those from the pJHEQ, how much the wJHEQ would decrease missing answers, and which JHEQ the participants preferred to use. Methods: To measure equivalence between the pJHEQ and wJHEQ, we evaluated the mean score difference for each subscale (pain, movement, mental) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; satisfaction, right hip pain, left hip pain) and then assessed the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) between the two scores. ICC values ≥0.75 were defined as excellent agreement. We used Bland–Altman analysis to assess level of agreement between the values of the two questionnaires. We compared the number of incomplete forms and amount of missing data between the two questionnaires. We investigated ease of use by asking the participants which format was easier to use. Results: This study comprised 113 patients (mean age 58.1 years, 81% female) with hip disease. Mean score differences for each subscale between the wJHEQ and pJHEQ were not significantly different. The values of ICC for each subscale and each VAS were all >0.75. All 113 participants completed the wJHEQ questionnaire, whereas nine patients did not complete the pJHEQ form. There was a significant statistical difference between the completion rate of the wJHEQ and that of the pJHEQ (p = .0017). Fifty-seven participants (55%) preferred the wJHEQ, whereas 33 participants (32%) preferred the pJHEQ. Conclusion: The wJHEQ was found to be equivalent to the original pJHEQ. The wJHEQ significantly decreased the numbers of missing answers and incomplete forms. The participants felt ease of use was nearly equivalent. The wJHEQ might help facilitate more complete assessments in clinical trials and research.

関連論文

参考文献

190

[1]

191

192

Ayers DC, Zheng H, Franklin PD. Integrating patient-reported outcomes into orthopaedic clinical

practice: Proof of concept from FORCE-TJR. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:3419–25.

[2]

Matsumoto T, Kaneuji A, Hiejima Y, Sugiyama H, Akiyama H, Atsumi T, et al. Japanese

193

Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ): a patient-based

194

evaluation tool for the hip-joint disease. The Subcommittee on Hip Disease Evaluation of the

195

Clinical Outcome Committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association. J Orthop Sci. 2012;17:25–

196

38.

197

[3]

Jensen RE, Snyder CF, Abernethy AP, Basch E, Potosky AL, Roberts AC, et al. Review of

198

electronic patient-reported outcomes systems used in cancer clinical care. J Oncol Pract. 2014;

199

10:e215–22.

200

[4]

Shervin N, Dorrwachter J, Bragdon CR, Shervin D, Zurakowski D, Malchau H. Comparison of

201

paper and computer-based questionnaire modes for measuring health outcomes in patients

202

undergoing total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93:285–93.

203

[5]

Marsh JD, Bryant DM, Macdonald SJ, Naudie DD. Patients respond similarly to paper and

204

electronic versions of the WOMAC and SF-12 following total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty.

205

2014, 29:670–3.

206

[6]

Takegami Y, Seki T, Kaneuji A, Nakao A, Hasegawa Y, Ishiguro N. Validity of a tablet computer

207

version of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association hip disease evaluation questionnaire: a pilot

208

study. Nagoya J Med Sci. 2016;78:237–44.

209

[7]

210

211

Saghaei M, Saghaei S. Implementation of an open-source customizable minimization program for

allocation of patients to parallel groups in clinical trials. J Biomed Eng. 2011; 04:734–9.

[8]

Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Vondechend M, Bellamy N, Theiler R. Validation and patient acceptance of

212

a computer touchscreen version of the WOMAC 3.1 osteoarthritis index. Ann Rheum Dis.

213

2005;64:80–4.

214

[9]

Seki T, Ishiguro N, Hasegawa Y, Ikeuchi K, Hiejima Y. Reliability and validity of the Japanese

215

Orthopaedic Association hip disease evaluation questionnaire (JHEQ) for patients with hip disease.

216

J Orthop Sci.2013;18:782–7.

217

[10]

218

219

Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of

clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;327:307–10.

[11]

Kvien TK, Mowinckel P, Heiberg T, Dammann KL, Dale Ø, Aanerud GJ, et al. Performance of

220

health status measures with a pen based personal digital assistant. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64:1480–

221

4.

222

[12]

223

224

oxygen saturation monitoring in the critically ill. Intensive Care Med. 2004;30:1572–8.

[13]

225

226

Reinhart K, Kuhn HJ, Hartog C, Bredle DL. Continuous central venous and pulmonary artery

Kanda Y. Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software 'EZR' for medical statistics.

Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013;48:452e8.

[14]

Gwaltney CJ, Shields AL, Shiffman S. Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil

227

administration of patient-reported outcome measures: A meta-analytic review. Value Health.

228

2008;11:322–33.

229

[15]

230

231

gender, age, or cause of pain? Acad Emerg Med. 1998;5:1086–90.

[16]

232

233

236

Bodian CA, Freedman G, Hossain S, Eisenkraft JB, Beilin Y. The visual analog scale for pain:

clinical significance in postoperative patients. Anesthesiology. 2001;95:1356–61.

[17]

234

235

Kelly AM. Does the clinically significant difference in visual analog scale pain scores vary with

Marquié JC, Jourdan-Boddaert L, Huet N. Do older adults underestimate their actual computer

knowledge? Behav Inf Technol. 2010;21:273–80.

[18]

Igbaria M, Chakrabarti A. Computer anxiety and attitudes towards microcomputer use. Behav Inf

Technol. 1990;9(3):229–41.

237

238

Figure legend

239

Fig. 1. Scatter plot and Bland-Altman plot of the comparison of each VAS between the wJHEQ and

240

pJHEQ. A Patient satisfaction, B VAS of right hip pain, and C VAS of left hip pain.

241

242

Fig. 2. Age difference of the participants according to preference for the input method. Values are the

243

mean and standard deviation. *P value < 0.05 for post hoc analysis.

10

...

参考文献をもっと見る