一种用于收集患者报告的体力活动和不适结果的移动技术：横断面队列研究。

A Mobile Technology for Collecting Patient-Reported Physical Activity and Distress Outcomes: Cross-Sectional Cohort Study.

机构信息

Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 May 4;8(5):e17320. doi: 10.2196/17320.

DOI:10.2196/17320

PMID:32364508

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7235805/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Electronic patient-reported outcome (PROs) provides a fast and reliable assessment of a patient's health-related quality of life. Nevertheless, using PRO in the traditional paper format is not practical for clinical practice due to the limitations associated with data analysis and management. A questionnaire app was developed to address the need for a practical way to group and use distress and physical activity assessment tools.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the level of agreement between electronic (mobile) and paper-and-pencil questionnaire responses.

METHODS

We validated the app version of the distress thermometer (DT), International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). A total of 102 participants answered the paper and app versions of the DT and IPAQ, and 96 people completed the PHQ-9. The study outcomes were the correlation of the data between the paper-and-pencil and app versions.

RESULTS

A total of 106 consecutive breast cancer patients were enrolled and analyzed for validation of paper and electronic (app) versions. The Spearman correlation values of paper and app surveys for patients who responded to the DT questionnaire within 7 days, within 3 days, and on the same day were .415 (P<.001), .437 (P<.001), and .603 (P<.001), respectively. Similarly, the paper and app survey correlation values of the IPAQ total physical activity metabolic equivalent of task (MET; Q2-6) were .291 (P=.003), .324 (P=.005), and .427 (P=.01), respectively. The correlation of the sum of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (Q1-9) according to the time interval between the paper-based questionnaire and the app-based questionnaire was .469 for 14 days (P<.001), .574 for 7 days (P<.001), .593 for 3 days (P<.001), and .512 for the same day (P=.03). These were all statistically significant. Similarly, the correlation of the PHQ (Q10) value according to the time interval between the paper-based questionnaire and the app-based questionnaire was .283 for 14 days (P=.005), .409 for 7 days (P=.001), .415 for 3 days (P=.009), and .736 for the same day (P=.001). These were all statistically significant. In the overall trend, the shorter the interval between the paper-and-pencil questionnaire and the app-based questionnaire, the higher the correlation value.

CONCLUSIONS

The app version of the distress and physical activity questionnaires has shown validity and a high level of association with the paper-based DT, IPAQ (Q2-6), and PHQ-9. The app-based questionnaires were not inferior to their respective paper versions and confirm the feasibility for their use in clinical practice. The high correlation between paper and mobile app data allows the use of new mobile apps to benefit the overall health care system.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03072966; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03072966.

摘要

背景

电子患者报告结局（PRO）可快速、可靠地评估患者的健康相关生活质量。然而，由于与数据分析和管理相关的限制，传统纸质格式的 PRO 在临床实践中并不实用。开发了一个问卷应用程序，以满足实用分组和使用困扰和身体活动评估工具的需求。

目的

本研究旨在评估电子（移动）和纸质问卷应答之间的一致性程度。

方法

我们验证了困扰温度计（DT）、国际身体活动问卷（IPAQ）和患者健康问卷-9（PHQ-9）的应用程序版本。共有 102 名参与者回答了纸质和应用程序版本的 DT 和 IPAQ，96 人完成了 PHQ-9。研究结果是纸质和应用程序版本之间数据的相关性。

结果

共纳入 106 例连续乳腺癌患者，对纸质和电子（应用程序）版本进行验证。在 7 天内、3 天内和同一天内对 DT 问卷做出反应的患者中，纸质和应用程序调查的 Spearman 相关值分别为.415（P<.001）、.437（P<.001）和.603（P<.001）。同样，纸质和应用程序调查 IPAQ 总体力活动代谢当量任务（Q2-6）的相关性值分别为.291（P=.003）、.324（P=.005）和.427（P=.01）。根据纸质问卷和基于应用程序的问卷之间的时间间隔，患者健康问卷-9（Q1-9）总和的相关性为 14 天为.469（P<.001），7 天为.574（P<.001），3 天为.593（P<.001），同一天为.512（P=.03）。这些都是具有统计学意义的。同样，根据纸质问卷和基于应用程序的问卷之间的时间间隔，PHQ（Q10）值的相关性为 14 天为.283（P=.005），7 天为.409（P=.001），3 天为.415（P=.009），同一天为.736（P=.001）。这些都是具有统计学意义的。总的来说，纸质问卷和基于应用程序的问卷之间的间隔时间越短，相关性值越高。