OBJECTIVE: This randomized methodologic study sought to test the reliability of an Internet questionnaire and investigate the differences in response rates between traditional pen-and-paper questionnaires and Internet questionnaires for measuring patient-reported outcome after total hip replacement surgery. METHODS: From the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, 2400 patients were chosen at random but stratified by age, sex, and diagnosis for inclusion in a 4-year follow-up using the health-relatedquality of life tool EQ-5D and visual analogue scales for pain and satisfaction. The patients were randomized to answer the follow-up model protocol either via a password-protected Internet questionnaire or via a mailed pen-and-paper questionnaire. RESULTS: A reliability test for the Internet follow-up instrument showed adequate correlation. However, the Internet group and the pen-and-paper group differed significantly (P < 0.001) with a 92% response rate in the latter and 49% in the former. Adjusted to the normal age distribution of the total hip replacement population, the Internet response rate was 34%. CONCLUSIONS: The patient-administered Internet questionnaire alone does not give a sufficient response rate in the total hip replacement population to replace the pen-and-paper questionnaire. However, the system is reliable and could be used for measuring patient-reported outcome if supplemented with traditional pen-and-paper questionnaires for Internet nonrespondents. It is expected that this answer procedure will soon predominate in view of the general development of Internet functions. Register work may then become less resource-consuming and the results may be analyzed in real time.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: This randomized methodologic study sought to test the reliability of an Internet questionnaire and investigate the differences in response rates between traditional pen-and-paper questionnaires and Internet questionnaires for measuring patient-reported outcome after total hip replacement surgery. METHODS: From the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, 2400 patients were chosen at random but stratified by age, sex, and diagnosis for inclusion in a 4-year follow-up using the health-related quality of life tool EQ-5D and visual analogue scales for pain and satisfaction. The patients were randomized to answer the follow-up model protocol either via a password-protected Internet questionnaire or via a mailed pen-and-paper questionnaire. RESULTS: A reliability test for the Internet follow-up instrument showed adequate correlation. However, the Internet group and the pen-and-paper group differed significantly (P < 0.001) with a 92% response rate in the latter and 49% in the former. Adjusted to the normal age distribution of the total hip replacement population, the Internet response rate was 34%. CONCLUSIONS: The patient-administered Internet questionnaire alone does not give a sufficient response rate in the total hip replacement population to replace the pen-and-paper questionnaire. However, the system is reliable and could be used for measuring patient-reported outcome if supplemented with traditional pen-and-paper questionnaires for Internet nonrespondents. It is expected that this answer procedure will soon predominate in view of the general development of Internet functions. Register work may then become less resource-consuming and the results may be analyzed in real time.
Authors: Ola Rolfson; Alastair Rothwell; Art Sedrakyan; Kate Eresian Chenok; Eric Bohm; Kevin J Bozic; Göran Garellick Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2011-12-21 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Claire Tilbury; Claudia S Leichtenberg; Bart L Kaptein; Lennard A Koster; Suzan H M Verdegaal; Ron Onstenk; Henrike M J van der Linden-van der Zwaag; Rover Krips; Herman H Kaptijn; Stephan B W Vehmeijer; Willem-Jan C M Marijnissen; Jorit J L Meesters; Stephanie M van Rooden; Ronald Brand; Rob G H H Nelissen; Maaike G J Gademan; Thea P M Vliet Vlieland Journal: J Patient Exp Date: 2019-06-04
Authors: J C Keurentjes; M Fiocco; C So-Osman; R Ostenk; A W M M Koopman-Van Gemert; R G Pöll; R G H H Nelissen Journal: Bone Joint Res Date: 2013-11-07 Impact factor: 5.853
Authors: Lindsay A Jibb; James S Khan; Puneet Seth; Chitra Lalloo; Lauren Mulrooney; Kathryn Nicholson; Dominik A Nowak; Harneel Kaur; Alyssandra Chee-A-Tow; Joel Foster; Jennifer N Stinson Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-06-16 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Katie Gillies; Anna Kearney; Ciara Keenan; Shaun Treweek; Jemma Hudson; Valerie C Brueton; Thomas Conway; Andrew Hunter; Louise Murphy; Peter J Carr; Greta Rait; Paul Manson; Magaly Aceves-Martins Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-03-06
Authors: Niels Henrik Ingvar Hjollund; Louise Pape Larsen; Karin Biering; Soren Paaske Johnsen; Erik Riiskjær; Liv Marit Schougaard Journal: Interact J Med Res Date: 2014-02-11
Authors: Ola Rolfson; Eric Bohm; Patricia Franklin; Stephen Lyman; Geke Denissen; Jill Dawson; Jennifer Dunn; Kate Eresian Chenok; Michael Dunbar; Søren Overgaard; Göran Garellick; Anne Lübbeke Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2016-05-26 Impact factor: 3.717