TY - JOUR
T1 - Validation of electronic administration of knee surveys among ACL-injured patients
AU - Nguyen, Joseph
AU - Marx, Robert
AU - Hidaka, Chisa
AU - Wilson, Sean
AU - Lyman, Stephen
N1 - Funding Information:
Two authors were the recipients of a grant from the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM) directly pertaining to this study. The same two authors are also recipients of grants and funding from the Clinical and Translational Science Center (CTSC) providing institutional support not directly pertaining to this study.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016, European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA).
PY - 2017/10/1
Y1 - 2017/10/1
N2 - Purpose: Knee-specific patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important tools in evaluating the effectiveness of sports medicine interventions. The PROMs were originally developed for paper administration, but electronic data capture technologies offer potential benefits such as increased efficiency and accuracy. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of touch screen versus paper administration using several common knee-specific and general health surveys. Methods: Agreement between scores was compared for knee-specific PROMs administered on paper versus computer; paper versus tablet; computer versus tablet in 60 patients per group undergoing ACL reconstruction. Surveys were given at pre-operative assessment and between 1 and 7 days later. Weighted kappa statistic (κ) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to test agreement between the two modalities in: IKDC Subjective Knee Form, Marx Activity Scale, Tegner Activity Level Scale, and Lysholm Knee Scale. SF-12 Physical and Mental Component Summary scores were also assessed. Results: Response rate was over 90 %. Mean age was 29.6 ± 10.9 years, with patients in the paper–computer cohort being 4 years older than in the other groups. Agreement was substantial or better for all PROMs collected: IKDC Subjective (ICC: 0.79); Marx (ICC: 0.70); Lysholm (ICC: 0.65); and Tegner (κ = 0.67). Agreement for the SF-12 PCS (ICC: 0.77) and MCS (ICC: 0.73) was also found to have substantial agreement. Conclusion: In conclusion, touch screen-based PROMs are a valid capture method, providing reliable results relative to traditional paper survey administration. Digital methods of direct data capture may also foster multi-centre collaborations and allow for more accurate comparisons of outcomes between patient groups in clinical practice and orthopaedic research. Level of evidence: II.
AB - Purpose: Knee-specific patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important tools in evaluating the effectiveness of sports medicine interventions. The PROMs were originally developed for paper administration, but electronic data capture technologies offer potential benefits such as increased efficiency and accuracy. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of touch screen versus paper administration using several common knee-specific and general health surveys. Methods: Agreement between scores was compared for knee-specific PROMs administered on paper versus computer; paper versus tablet; computer versus tablet in 60 patients per group undergoing ACL reconstruction. Surveys were given at pre-operative assessment and between 1 and 7 days later. Weighted kappa statistic (κ) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to test agreement between the two modalities in: IKDC Subjective Knee Form, Marx Activity Scale, Tegner Activity Level Scale, and Lysholm Knee Scale. SF-12 Physical and Mental Component Summary scores were also assessed. Results: Response rate was over 90 %. Mean age was 29.6 ± 10.9 years, with patients in the paper–computer cohort being 4 years older than in the other groups. Agreement was substantial or better for all PROMs collected: IKDC Subjective (ICC: 0.79); Marx (ICC: 0.70); Lysholm (ICC: 0.65); and Tegner (κ = 0.67). Agreement for the SF-12 PCS (ICC: 0.77) and MCS (ICC: 0.73) was also found to have substantial agreement. Conclusion: In conclusion, touch screen-based PROMs are a valid capture method, providing reliable results relative to traditional paper survey administration. Digital methods of direct data capture may also foster multi-centre collaborations and allow for more accurate comparisons of outcomes between patient groups in clinical practice and orthopaedic research. Level of evidence: II.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84975121912&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84975121912&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00167-016-4189-8
DO - 10.1007/s00167-016-4189-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 27316698
AN - SCOPUS:84975121912
SN - 0942-2056
VL - 25
SP - 3116
EP - 3122
JO - Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
JF - Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
IS - 10
ER -