通过电话访谈与患者在诊所进行自我调查来评估患者报告的结局指标：我们测量的是同一事物吗？
Assessing Patient Reported Outcomes Measures via Phone Interviews Versus Patient Self-Survey in the Clinic: Are We Measuring the Same Thing?
作者信息
Adogwa Owoicho, Elsamadicy Aladine A, Cheng Joseph, Bagley Carlos
机构信息
Division of Neurosurgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Division of Neurosurgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
出版信息
World Neurosurg. 2016 Mar;87:230-4. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2015.10.092. Epub 2015 Nov 5.
BACKGROUND
Longitudinally following patients requires a full-time employee (FTE)-dependent data inflow infrastructure. There are efforts to capture patient-reported outcomes (PROs) by the use of non-FTE-dependent methodologies. In this study, we set out to assess the reliability of PRO data captured via FTE-dependent compared with non-FTE-dependent methodologies.
METHODS
A total of 119 adult patients (65 men) who underwent 1-and 2-level lumbar fusions at Duke University Medical Center were enrolled in this prospective study. Enrollment criteria included available demographic, clinical, and PRO data. All patients completed 2 sets of questionnaires--the first a phone interviews and the second a self-survey. There was at least a 2-week period between the phone interviews and self-survey. Questionnaires included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the visual analog scale for back pain (VAS-BP), and the visual analog scale for leg pain (VAS-LP). Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare the reliability of baseline PRO data captured.
RESULTS
A total of 39.49% of patients were smokers, 21.00% had diabetes, and 11.76% had coronary artery disease; 26.89% reported history of anxiety disorder, and 28.57% reported history of depression. A total of 97.47% of patients had a high-school diploma or General Education Development, and 49.57% attained a 4-year college degree or postgraduate degree. We observed a high correlation between baseline PRO data captured between FTE-dependent versus non-FTE dependent methodologies (ODI: r = -0.89, VAS-BP: r = 0.74, VAS-LP: r = 0.70). There was no difference in PROs of baseline pain and functional disability between FTE-dependent and non-FTE-dependent methodologies: baseline ODI (FTE-dependent: 47.73 ± 16.77 [mean ± SD] vs. non-FTE-dependent: 45.81 ± 12.11, P = 0.39), VAS-LP (FTE-dependent: 6.13 ± 2.78 vs. non-FTE-dependent: 6.46 ± 2.79, P = 0.36) and VAS-BP (FTE-dependent: 6.33 ± 2.90 vs. non-FTE-dependent: 6.53 ± 2.48, P = 0.57).
CONCLUSION
Our study suggests that there is great reliability between PRO data captured between FTE-dependent and non-FTE-dependent methodologies.
背景
对患者进行纵向跟踪需要一个依赖全职员工（FTE）的数据流基础设施。目前正在努力通过使用不依赖FTE的方法来获取患者报告的结局（PRO）。在本研究中，我们着手评估通过依赖FTE与不依赖FTE的方法所获取的PRO数据的可靠性。
方法
共有119名成年患者（65名男性）在杜克大学医学中心接受了1级和2级腰椎融合手术，被纳入这项前瞻性研究。纳入标准包括可用的人口统计学、临床和PRO数据。所有患者完成了2套问卷——第一套是电话访谈，第二套是自我调查。电话访谈和自我调查之间至少间隔2周。问卷包括奥斯威斯利残疾指数（ODI）、背痛视觉模拟量表（VAS-BP）和腿痛视觉模拟量表（VAS-LP）。采用重复测量方差分析来比较所获取的基线PRO数据的可靠性。
结果
共有39.49%的患者为吸烟者，21.00%患有糖尿病，11.76%患有冠状动脉疾病；26.89%的患者报告有焦虑症病史，28.57%的患者报告有抑郁症病史。共有97.47%的患者拥有高中文凭或同等学历，49.57%的患者获得了4年制大学学位或研究生学位。我们观察到，依赖FTE与不依赖FTE的方法所获取的基线PRO数据之间具有高度相关性（ODI：r = -0.89，VAS-BP：r = 0.74，VAS-LP：r = 0.70）。依赖FTE与不依赖FTE的方法在基线疼痛和功能残疾的PRO方面没有差异：基线ODI（依赖FTE：47.73±16.77[平均值±标准差] vs.不依赖FTE：45.81±12.11，P = 0.39）、VAS-LP（依赖FTE：6.13±2.78 vs.不依赖FTE：6.46±2.79，P = 0.36）和VAS-BP（依赖FTE：6.33±2.90 vs.不依赖FTE：6.53±2.48，P = 0.57）。
结论
我们的研究表明，依赖FTE与不依赖FTE的方法所获取的PRO数据之间具有很高的可靠性。
Zotero 插件