Literature DB >> 32452929

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

Ritsaart F Westenberg1, Juliette Nierich1, Jonathan Lans1, Rohit Garg1, Kyle R Eberlin2, Neal C Chen1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Long-term follow-up studies are an important tool in the evaluation of orthopaedic illness and its treatment options. However, a patient's participation in a follow-up study may be affected by several factors, leading to variability in response rates and the risk of selection bias. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the average response rate in hand surgery questionnaire studies? (2) What factors are associated with higher and lower response rates to research questionnaires? (3) What factors are associated with higher and lower contact, initial participation, and completion rates?
METHODS: We included 798 adult patients who were enrolled in one of 12 questionnaire follow-up studies in the hand and upper extremity service of our institution. All included studies evaluated patient-reported outcomes for the surgical treatment of upper extremity conditions using questionnaires and all used the same enrollment design. Patients were invited by letter to ask if they would be willing to participate, and we informed them that they would be contacted by telephone at least three times if they did not respond to the letter. Patients were contacted at a median of 6.6 years (interquartile range [IQR] 3.7 to 11) after surgery. The successful response rate was 49% (390 of 798 patients). We manually reviewed records to collect data on patient characteristics, and we performed bivariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with the contact rate (percentage of patients reached by either mail, phone, or email), initial response rate (percentage of reached patients who initiated participation), completion rate (percentage of patients who initiated participation and completed the entire follow-up questionnaire), and our primary outcome successful response rate (percentage of patients who were contacted and who completed the entire questionnaire).
RESULTS: The average response rate in hand surgery questionnaire studies was 49% (390 of 798 patients). In the multivariable analysis, enrollment of women (odds ratio 1.43 [95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.97]; p = 0.031) was independently associated with higher response rates. On the contrary, a longer follow-up time from surgery (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.92 to 0.99]; p = 0.015) and multiple researchers contacting patients (OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.37 to 0.71]; p < 0.001) were independently associated with lower response rates. The contact rate was higher for women (OR 1.46 [95% CI 1.03 to 2.06]; p = 0.034) and patients with higher income (OR 1.000007 [95% CI 1.000001 to 1.000013]; p = 0.019). The contact rate was lower in patients with a longer follow-up time from surgery (OR 0.93 [95% CI 0.90 to 0.97]; p = 0.001). The initial participation rate was lower when patients were contacted by multiple researchers (OR: 0.34 [95% CI 0.23 to 0.52]; p < 0.001). Studies with a lower number of questions (36; IQR 22 to 46) were completed more frequently than studies with a higher number of questions (51; IQR 39 to 67; p = 0.044).
CONCLUSIONS: Studies assessing long-term outcomes that have a large proportion of men and longer follow-up time tend to have lower response rates. When performing a follow-up study, it seems beneficial to have one researcher contact the patients and use a shorter questionnaire. Results of this study can help clarify the response rates in hand surgery follow-up questionnaire studies and help with the planning of future follow-up studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32452929      PMCID: PMC7899400          DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001319

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.755


  27 in total

1.  Optimizing patient-reported outcome and risk factor reporting from cancer survivors: a randomized trial of four different survey methods among colorectal cancer survivors.

Authors:  Heather Spencer Feigelson; Carmit K McMullen; Sarah Madrid; Andrew T Sterrett; J David Powers; Erica Blum-Barnett; Pamala A Pawloski; Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss; Virginia P Quinn; David E Arterburn; Douglas A Corley
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2017-01-13       Impact factor: 4.442

2.  Non-response in surveys of very old people.

Authors:  Michael Wagner; Matthias Kuppler; Christian Rietz; Roman Kaspar
Journal:  Eur J Ageing       Date:  2018-09-03

3.  Changes in Depression, Health Anxiety, and Pain Catastrophizing Between Enrollment and 1 Month After a Radius Fracture.

Authors:  Sina Golkari; Teun Teunis; David Ring; Ana-Maria Vranceanu
Journal:  Psychosomatics       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 2.386

4.  Optimizing Call Patterns for Landline and Cell Phone Surveys.

Authors:  Becky Reimer; Veronica Roth; Robert Montgomery
Journal:  Proc Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2012

5.  Psychiatric and sociodemographic predictors of attrition in a longitudinal study: The Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS).

Authors:  R de Graaf; R V Bijl; F Smit; A Ravelli; W A Vollebergh
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2000-12-01       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Does a Brief Mindfulness Exercise Improve Outcomes in Upper Extremity Patients? A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Ritsaart F Westenberg; Emily L Zale; Tessa J Heinhuis; Sezai Özkan; Adam Nazzal; Sang-Gil Lee; Neal C Chen; Ana-Maria Vranceanu
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  A Comparative Analysis of Academic and Nonacademic Hospitals on Outcome Measures and Patient Satisfaction.

Authors:  Alissa S Chen; Lee Revere; Alissa Ratanatawan; Christopher L Beck; Julio A Allo
Journal:  Am J Med Qual       Date:  2018-09-23       Impact factor: 1.852

8.  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

9.  Effect of questionnaire length, personalisation and reminder type on response rate to a complex postal survey: randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Shannon Sahlqvist; Yena Song; Fiona Bull; Emma Adams; John Preston; David Ogilvie
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2011-05-06       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  A telephone survey of factors affecting willingness to participate in health research surveys.

Authors:  D C Glass; H L Kelsall; C Slegers; A B Forbes; B Loff; D Zion; L Fritschi
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-10-05       Impact factor: 3.295

View more
  3 in total

1.  CORR Insights®: What Factors Are Associated With Response Rates for Long-term Follow-up Questionnaire Studies in Hand Surgery?

Authors:  Ibidumo Igah
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 4.755

2.  A Comparison of Open Carpal Tunnel Release Outcomes Between Procedure Room and Operating Room Settings.

Authors:  Andrew R Stephens; Andrew R Tyser; Angela P Presson; Brian Orleans; Angela A Wang; Douglas T Hutchinson; Nikolas H Kazmers
Journal:  J Hand Surg Glob Online       Date:  2020-12-04

3.  Short Message Service-Based Collection of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures on Hand Surgery Global Outreach Trips: A Pilot Feasibility Study.

Authors:  Lauren M Shapiro; Mung Phan Đình; Luan Tran; Paige M Fox; Marc J Richard; Robin N Kamal
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 2.342

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.