Literature DB >> 25414613

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

Sjoerd P F T Nota1, Joost A Strooker1, David Ring2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is a need to determine the difference in response to mail, e-mail, and phone in clinical research surveys.
METHODS: We enrolled 150 new and follow-up patients presenting to our hand and upper extremity department. Patients were assigned to complete a survey by mail, e-mail, or phone 3 months after enrollment, altering the follow-up method every 5 patients, until we had 3 groups of 50 patients. At initial enrollment and at 3 month follow-up (range 2-5 months), patients completed the short version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH), the short version of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2), the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ), and rated their pain intensity.
RESULTS: The percent of patients that completed the survey was 34 % for mail, 24 % for e-mail, and 80 % for phone. Factors associated with responding to the survey were older age, nonsmoking, and lower pain intensity. Working full-time was associated with not responding.
CONCLUSIONS: The response rate to survey by phone is significantly higher than by mail or e-mail. Younger age, smoking, higher pain intensity, and working full-time are associated with not responding. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic I.

Entities:  

Keywords:  E-mail; Follow-up evaluation; Hand surgery research; Mail; Phone

Year:  2014        PMID: 25414613      PMCID: PMC4235909          DOI: 10.1007/s11552-014-9618-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hand (N Y)        ISSN: 1558-9447


  12 in total

1.  Patterns of non-response to a mail survey.

Authors:  C A Macera; K L Jackson; D R Davis; J J Kronenfeld; S N Blair
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Telephone vs mail response to an emergency department patient satisfaction survey.

Authors:  K J Rhee; R A Allen; J Bird
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 3.451

3.  Factors associated with survey response in hand surgery research.

Authors:  Arjan G J Bot; Jade A Anderson; Valentin Neuhaus; David Ring
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  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

5.  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

6.  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

7.  Telephone follow-up was more expensive but more efficient than postal in a national stroke registry.

Authors:  Natasha A Lannin; Craig Anderson; Joyce Lim; Kate Paice; Chris Price; Steven Faux; Christopher Levi; Geoffrey Donnan; Dominique Cadilhac
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 6.437

8.  The Tromsø Heart Study: responders and non-responders to a health questionnaire, do they differ?

Authors:  B K Jacobsen; D S Thelle
Journal:  Scand J Soc Med       Date:  1988

9.  Would loss to follow-up bias the outcome evaluation of patients operated for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine?

Authors:  Tore K Solberg; Andreas Sørlie; Kristin Sjaavik; Øystein P Nygaard; Tor Ingebrigtsen
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-12-29       Impact factor: 3.717

10.  Effects of phone versus mail survey methods on the measurement of health-related quality of life and emotional and behavioural problems in adolescents.

Authors:  Michael Erhart; Ralf M Wetzel; André Krügel; Ulrike Ravens-Sieberer
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-12-30       Impact factor: 3.295

View more
  15 in total

1.  Impact of emergency physician-provided patient education about alternative care venues.

Authors:  Pankaj B Patel; David R Vinson; Marla N Gardner; David A Wulf; Patricia Kipnis; Vincent Liu; Gabriel J Escobar
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 2.229

2.  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

3.  The (in)stability of 21st century orthopedic patient contact information and its implications on clinical research: A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Daniel A London; Jeffrey G Stepan; Charles A Goldfarb; Martin I Boyer; Ryan P Calfee
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2016-11-30       Impact factor: 2.486

4.  Predictors of successful telephone follow-up in a multicenter study of infants with severe bronchiolitis.

Authors:  Vickie Wu; Nora Abo-Sido; Janice A Espinola; Courtney N Tierney; Kathleen T Tedesco; Ashley F Sullivan; Carlos A Camargo
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 3.797

5.  Pre-operative Two-Point Discrimination Predicts Response to Carpal Tunnel Release.

Authors:  Lauren E Wessel; Charles M Ekstein; Danielle C Marshall; Aaron Z Chen; Daniel A Osei; Duretti T Fufa
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2019-07-05

6.  A Novel Mobile Phone Text Messaging Platform Improves Collection of Patient-Reported Post-operative Pain and Opioid Use Following Orthopedic Surgery.

Authors:  Ajay Premkumar; Francis C Lovecchio; Jeffrey G Stepan; Cynthia A Kahlenberg; Jason L Blevins; Todd J Albert; Michael B Cross
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2018-10-22

7.  Does Resiliency Mediate the Association of Psychological Adaptability with Limitations and Pain Intensity after Upper Extremity Trauma?

Authors:  Cindy Nguyen; Joost T P Kortlever; Amanda I Gonzalez; Tom J Crijns; David Ring; Gregg A Vagner; Lee M Reichel
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2021-11

8.  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

9.  Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance consensus clinical treatment plans for juvenile dermatomyositis with skin predominant disease.

Authors:  Susan Kim; Philip Kahn; Angela B Robinson; Bianca Lang; Andrew Shulman; Edward J Oberle; Kenneth Schikler; Megan Lea Curran; Lilliana Barillas-Arias; Charles H Spencer; Lisa G Rider; Adam M Huber
Journal:  Pediatr Rheumatol Online J       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 3.054

10.  Electronic health record-integrated approach for collection of patient-reported outcome measures: a retrospective evaluation.

Authors:  Maggie E Horn; Emily K Reinke; Richard C Mather; Jonathan D O'Donnell; Steven Z George
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.