Frennered Karin, Hägg Olle, Wessberg Per
From the Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgren University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Mar 15;35(6):697-703. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b43a20.
Validation study.
A system for patient self-recording on a computer touch-screen was developed. The validity of this method compared with the use of regular paper-and-pen questionnaires was studied.
Systematic evaluation of health problems often involves the use of self-reporting questionnaires in order to collect data on different variables. Recording of such data for subsequent analysis requires several steps including filling out of paper forms and secretarial work. Missing values and misrecordings are frequent problems.
Seventy-nine patients with back problems visiting our outpatient clinic for surgical evaluation were invited to take part in the study by answering a mailed questionnaire concerning background data, pain, function, quality of life, and depressive symptoms approximately 3 weeks before their visit. At the day of the visit they were asked to again answer the same questions with a replicate response option format displayed on a computer touch-screen.
The agreement concerning background history questions, measured by kappa values was generally good (0.71-1.0). For visual analogue scale recordings (0-100) of back and leg pain, the mean of the differences were 1.1 and 2.1, respectively, and the correlations (Pearson) 0.72 and 0.87. The Euro-Qol 5 Dimension Score, the General Function Score, the Zung Depression Scale and the physical dimensions of the Short Form-36 showed a high degree of agreement between paper and screen recordings with difference means close to 0 and reliabilities comparing well to published methodologic errors for paper form versions. There were, however, differences concerning the mental components of the SF-36 with somewhat higher ratings on screen recordings. Missing values were 0% for screen recordings and for paper forms, 2.3% on individual questions and 12% on composite scores.
Computerized touch-screen questionnaires virtually eliminates missing values and show good validity and reliability compared to paper forms. The SF-36 tended to produce slightly higher values on touch-screen recordings in questions concerning mental health.
验证性研究。
开发一种用于患者在电脑触摸屏上自我记录的系统。研究该方法与使用常规纸笔问卷相比的有效性。
对健康问题的系统评估通常涉及使用自我报告问卷来收集不同变量的数据。记录此类数据以便后续分析需要几个步骤,包括填写纸质表格和秘书工作。缺失值和记录错误是常见问题。
邀请79名因背部问题前来我院门诊进行手术评估的患者,在就诊前约3周通过邮寄问卷回答有关背景数据、疼痛、功能、生活质量和抑郁症状的问题。在就诊当天,要求他们再次回答相同问题,问题以重复回答选项格式显示在电脑触摸屏上。
通过kappa值衡量的关于背景病史问题的一致性总体良好(0.71 - 1.0)。对于背部和腿部疼痛的视觉模拟量表记录(0 - 100),差异均值分别为1.1和2.1,相关性(Pearson)分别为0.72和0.87。欧洲五维度健康量表得分、一般功能得分、zung抑郁量表以及简短健康调查问卷(SF - 36)的身体维度在纸质记录和屏幕记录之间显示出高度一致性,差异均值接近0,可靠性与已发表的纸质版方法学误差相比良好。然而,SF - 36的心理成分存在差异,屏幕记录的评分略高。屏幕记录的缺失值为0%,纸质表格的缺失值在单个问题上为2.3%,在综合得分上为12%。
与纸质表格相比,电脑触摸屏问卷几乎消除了缺失值,并且显示出良好的有效性和可靠性。在关于心理健康的问题上,SF - 36在触摸屏记录上往往产生略高的值。