An electronic patient-reported outcomes measurement system in paediatric orthopaedics

M. J. Sabatino, C. V. Gans, A. J. Zynda, J. S. Chung, S. M. Miller, P. L. Wilson, C. H. Jo, H. B. Ellis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of the study was to evaluate the reliability, review differences and assess patient satisfaction of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) compared with paper PROMs. Methods Participants between 12 and 19 years of age with a knee-related primary complaint were randomized into two groups. Group 1 completed paper PROMs followed by electronic, while Group 2 received the electronic followed by paper. PROMs included the Pediatric International Knee Documentation Committee (Pedi-IKDC), Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Pediatric Functional Activity Brief Scale (HSS Pedi-FABS), Tegner Activity Level Scale, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), PedsQL Teen and a satisfaction survey. Results In all, 87 participants were enrolled with one excluded due to incomplete PROMs. Of the 86 participants, 54 were female and 32 were male with an average age of 14.3 years (12 to 18). A high degree of reliability was found when comparing the paper and electronic versions of the Pedi-IKDC (0.946; p < 0.001), HSS Pedi-FABS (0.923; p < 0.001), PedsQL Teen (0.894; p < 0.001), Tegner Activity Level Scale before injury (0.848; p < 0.001) and the Tegner Activity Level Scale after (0.930; p < 0.001). Differences were noted between the VAS scores, with paper scores being significantly higher than electronic (5.3 versus 4.6; p < 0.001). While not significant, a trend was noted in which electronic PROMs took, overall, less time than paper (10.0 mins versus 11.2 mins; p = 0.096). Of all participants, 69.8% preferred the electronic PROMs, 67.4% felt they were faster, 93.0% stated they would complete forms at home prior to appointments and 91.8% were not concerned about the safety/privacy of electronic forms. Conclusion PROMs captured electronically were reliable when compared with paper. Electronic PROMs may be quicker, will not require manual scoring and are preferred by patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)431-437
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Children's Orthopaedics
Volume13
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2019

Fingerprint

Orthopedics
Pediatrics
Special Hospital
Knee
Visual Analog Scale
Documentation
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Privacy
Patient Satisfaction
Lysholm Knee Score
Appointments and Schedules
Safety
Wounds and Injuries

Keywords

  • electronic outcomes
  • orthopaedics
  • paediatrics
  • patient reported outcome measures

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

An electronic patient-reported outcomes measurement system in paediatric orthopaedics. / Sabatino, M. J.; Gans, C. V.; Zynda, A. J.; Chung, J. S.; Miller, S. M.; Wilson, P. L.; Jo, C. H.; Ellis, H. B.

In: Journal of Children's Orthopaedics, Vol. 13, No. 4, 08.2019, p. 431-437.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sabatino, M. J. ; Gans, C. V. ; Zynda, A. J. ; Chung, J. S. ; Miller, S. M. ; Wilson, P. L. ; Jo, C. H. ; Ellis, H. B. / An electronic patient-reported outcomes measurement system in paediatric orthopaedics. In: Journal of Children's Orthopaedics. 2019 ; Vol. 13, No. 4. pp. 431-437.
@article{7f19e36e8ac0473389b68c976b53f4c9,
title = "An electronic patient-reported outcomes measurement system in paediatric orthopaedics",
abstract = "Purpose The purpose of the study was to evaluate the reliability, review differences and assess patient satisfaction of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) compared with paper PROMs. Methods Participants between 12 and 19 years of age with a knee-related primary complaint were randomized into two groups. Group 1 completed paper PROMs followed by electronic, while Group 2 received the electronic followed by paper. PROMs included the Pediatric International Knee Documentation Committee (Pedi-IKDC), Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Pediatric Functional Activity Brief Scale (HSS Pedi-FABS), Tegner Activity Level Scale, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), PedsQL Teen and a satisfaction survey. Results In all, 87 participants were enrolled with one excluded due to incomplete PROMs. Of the 86 participants, 54 were female and 32 were male with an average age of 14.3 years (12 to 18). A high degree of reliability was found when comparing the paper and electronic versions of the Pedi-IKDC (0.946; p < 0.001), HSS Pedi-FABS (0.923; p < 0.001), PedsQL Teen (0.894; p < 0.001), Tegner Activity Level Scale before injury (0.848; p < 0.001) and the Tegner Activity Level Scale after (0.930; p < 0.001). Differences were noted between the VAS scores, with paper scores being significantly higher than electronic (5.3 versus 4.6; p < 0.001). While not significant, a trend was noted in which electronic PROMs took, overall, less time than paper (10.0 mins versus 11.2 mins; p = 0.096). Of all participants, 69.8{\%} preferred the electronic PROMs, 67.4{\%} felt they were faster, 93.0{\%} stated they would complete forms at home prior to appointments and 91.8{\%} were not concerned about the safety/privacy of electronic forms. Conclusion PROMs captured electronically were reliable when compared with paper. Electronic PROMs may be quicker, will not require manual scoring and are preferred by patients.",
keywords = "electronic outcomes, orthopaedics, paediatrics, patient reported outcome measures",
author = "Sabatino, {M. J.} and Gans, {C. V.} and Zynda, {A. J.} and Chung, {J. S.} and Miller, {S. M.} and Wilson, {P. L.} and Jo, {C. H.} and Ellis, {H. B.}",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1302/1863-2548.13.190053",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "431--437",
journal = "Journal of Children's Orthopaedics",
issn = "1863-2521",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An electronic patient-reported outcomes measurement system in paediatric orthopaedics

AU - Sabatino, M. J.

AU - Gans, C. V.

AU - Zynda, A. J.

AU - Chung, J. S.

AU - Miller, S. M.

AU - Wilson, P. L.

AU - Jo, C. H.

AU - Ellis, H. B.

PY - 2019/8

Y1 - 2019/8

N2 - Purpose The purpose of the study was to evaluate the reliability, review differences and assess patient satisfaction of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) compared with paper PROMs. Methods Participants between 12 and 19 years of age with a knee-related primary complaint were randomized into two groups. Group 1 completed paper PROMs followed by electronic, while Group 2 received the electronic followed by paper. PROMs included the Pediatric International Knee Documentation Committee (Pedi-IKDC), Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Pediatric Functional Activity Brief Scale (HSS Pedi-FABS), Tegner Activity Level Scale, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), PedsQL Teen and a satisfaction survey. Results In all, 87 participants were enrolled with one excluded due to incomplete PROMs. Of the 86 participants, 54 were female and 32 were male with an average age of 14.3 years (12 to 18). A high degree of reliability was found when comparing the paper and electronic versions of the Pedi-IKDC (0.946; p < 0.001), HSS Pedi-FABS (0.923; p < 0.001), PedsQL Teen (0.894; p < 0.001), Tegner Activity Level Scale before injury (0.848; p < 0.001) and the Tegner Activity Level Scale after (0.930; p < 0.001). Differences were noted between the VAS scores, with paper scores being significantly higher than electronic (5.3 versus 4.6; p < 0.001). While not significant, a trend was noted in which electronic PROMs took, overall, less time than paper (10.0 mins versus 11.2 mins; p = 0.096). Of all participants, 69.8% preferred the electronic PROMs, 67.4% felt they were faster, 93.0% stated they would complete forms at home prior to appointments and 91.8% were not concerned about the safety/privacy of electronic forms. Conclusion PROMs captured electronically were reliable when compared with paper. Electronic PROMs may be quicker, will not require manual scoring and are preferred by patients.

AB - Purpose The purpose of the study was to evaluate the reliability, review differences and assess patient satisfaction of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) compared with paper PROMs. Methods Participants between 12 and 19 years of age with a knee-related primary complaint were randomized into two groups. Group 1 completed paper PROMs followed by electronic, while Group 2 received the electronic followed by paper. PROMs included the Pediatric International Knee Documentation Committee (Pedi-IKDC), Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Pediatric Functional Activity Brief Scale (HSS Pedi-FABS), Tegner Activity Level Scale, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), PedsQL Teen and a satisfaction survey. Results In all, 87 participants were enrolled with one excluded due to incomplete PROMs. Of the 86 participants, 54 were female and 32 were male with an average age of 14.3 years (12 to 18). A high degree of reliability was found when comparing the paper and electronic versions of the Pedi-IKDC (0.946; p < 0.001), HSS Pedi-FABS (0.923; p < 0.001), PedsQL Teen (0.894; p < 0.001), Tegner Activity Level Scale before injury (0.848; p < 0.001) and the Tegner Activity Level Scale after (0.930; p < 0.001). Differences were noted between the VAS scores, with paper scores being significantly higher than electronic (5.3 versus 4.6; p < 0.001). While not significant, a trend was noted in which electronic PROMs took, overall, less time than paper (10.0 mins versus 11.2 mins; p = 0.096). Of all participants, 69.8% preferred the electronic PROMs, 67.4% felt they were faster, 93.0% stated they would complete forms at home prior to appointments and 91.8% were not concerned about the safety/privacy of electronic forms. Conclusion PROMs captured electronically were reliable when compared with paper. Electronic PROMs may be quicker, will not require manual scoring and are preferred by patients.

KW - electronic outcomes

KW - orthopaedics

KW - paediatrics

KW - patient reported outcome measures

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071885919&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85071885919&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1302/1863-2548.13.190053

DO - 10.1302/1863-2548.13.190053

M3 - Article

C2 - 31489051

AN - SCOPUS:85071885919

VL - 13

SP - 431

EP - 437

JO - Journal of Children's Orthopaedics

JF - Journal of Children's Orthopaedics

SN - 1863-2521

IS - 4

ER -