Literature DB >> 23801062

Factors associated with survey response in hand surgery research.

Arjan G J Bot1, Jade A Anderson, Valentin Neuhaus, David Ring.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A low response rate is believed to decrease the validity of survey studies. Factors associated with nonresponse to surveys are poorly characterized in orthopaedic research. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This study addressed whether (1) psychologic factors; (2) demographics; (3) illness-related factors; and (4) pain are predictors of a lower likelihood of a patient returning a mailed survey.
METHODS: One hundred four adult, new or return patients completed questionnaires including the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 depression scale, Short Health Anxiety Index, demographics, and a pain scale (0-10) during a routine visit to a hand and upper extremity surgeon. Of these patients, 38% had undergone surgery and the remainder was seen for various other conditions. Six months after their visit, patients were mailed the DASH questionnaire and a scale to rate their satisfaction with the visit (0-10). Bivariate analysis and logistic regression were used to determine risk factors for being a nonresponder to the followup of this study. The cohort consisted of 57 women and 47 men with a mean age of 51 years with various diagnoses. Thirty-five patients (34%) returned the questionnaire. Responders were satisfied with their visit (mean satisfaction, 8.7) and had a DASH score of 9.6.
RESULTS: Compared with patients who returned the questionnaires, nonresponders had higher pain catastrophizing scores, were younger, more frequently male, and had more pain at enrollment. In logistic regression, male sex (odds ratio [OR], 2.6), pain (OR, 1.3), and younger age (OR, 1.03) were associated with not returning the questionnaire.
CONCLUSIONS: Survey studies should be interpreted in light of the fact that patients who do not return questionnaires in a hand surgery practice differ from patients who do return them. Hand surgery studies that rely on questionnaire evaluation remote from study enrollment should include tactics to improve the response of younger, male patients with more pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23801062      PMCID: PMC3773144          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3126-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  30 in total

1.  The effects of response rate changes on the index of consumer sentiment.

Authors:  R Curtin; S Presser; E Singer
Journal:  Public Opin Q       Date:  2000

Review 2.  Difficulties in conducting a prospective outcome study.

Authors:  Jetske Ultee; Johan W van Neck; Jean Bart Jaquet; Steven E R Hovius
Journal:  Hand Clin       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 1.907

3.  Cost effectiveness of a prize draw on response to a postal questionnaire: results of a randomised trial among orthopaedic outpatients in Edinburgh.

Authors:  A P Brown; H E Lawrie; A D Kennedy; J A Webb; D J Torgerson; A M Grant
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 3.710

4.  The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure.

Authors:  K Kroenke; R L Spitzer; J B Williams
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Psychological differences between patients that elect operative or nonoperative treatment for trapeziometacarpal joint arthrosis.

Authors:  Santiago A Lozano-Calderon; J Sebastiaan Souer; Jesse B Jupiter; David Ring
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2008-03-29

6.  An investigation into nonresponse bias in a postal survey on urinary symptoms.

Authors:  H M Dallosso; R J Matthews; C W McGrother; M Clarke; S I Perry; C Shaw; C Jagger
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 5.588

7.  Response bias: effect on outcomes evaluation by mail surveys after total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jane Kim; Jess H Lonner; Charles L Nelson; Paul A Lotke
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  A randomised controlled trial of cemented versus cementless press-fit condylar total knee replacement: 15-year survival analysis.

Authors:  P N Baker; F M Khaw; L M G Kirk; C N A Esler; P J Gregg
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2007-12

9.  Validation of a proposed WOMAC short form for patients with hip osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Amaia Bilbao; José M Quintana; Antonio Escobar; Carlota Las Hayas; Miren Orive
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 3.186

10.  Surgery with disc prosthesis versus rehabilitation in patients with low back pain and degenerative disc: two year follow-up of randomised study.

Authors:  Christian Hellum; Lars Gunnar Johnsen; Kjersti Storheim; Oystein P Nygaard; Jens Ivar Brox; Ivar Rossvoll; Magne Rø; Leiv Sandvik; Oliver Grundnes
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-05-19
View more
  6 in total

1.  Patient satisfaction reporting-a cohort study comparing reporting of patient satisfaction pre- and post-discharge from hospital.

Authors:  Muhammad Fahad Ullah; Christina A Fleming; Kenneth Mealy
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 1.568

2.  Differences in response rates between mail, e-mail, and telephone follow-up in hand surgery research.

Authors:  Sjoerd P F T Nota; Joost A Strooker; David Ring
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2014-12

3.  Novel approach to improve patient satisfaction in the outpatient clinic setting.

Authors:  Chester J Donnally; Jose R Perez; William H Cade; Julianne Muñoz; Clifton L Page; Thomas M Best; Lee D Kaplan; Michael G Baraga
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2018-03-01

4.  What Factors Are Associated With Response Rates for Long-term Follow-up Questionnaire Studies in Hand Surgery?

Authors:  Ritsaart F Westenberg; Juliette Nierich; Jonathan Lans; Rohit Garg; Kyle R Eberlin; Neal C Chen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 4.755

5.  Return to Golf After Lumbar Fusion.

Authors:  Grant D Shifflett; Michael D Hellman; Philip K Louie; Christopher Mikhail; Kevin U Park; Frank M Phillips
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2016-11-01       Impact factor: 3.843

6.  The Remote Completion Rate of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Forms Before Scheduled Clinic Visits-A Proof-of-Concept Study Using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Computer Adaptive Test Questionnaires.

Authors:  Peter A Borowsky; Omar M Kadri; Jason E Meldau; Jacob Blanchett; Eric C Makhni
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev       Date:  2019-10-02
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.