Collection of Multiple Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (CRAM-PROMs) in orthopaedic trauma: a randomized trial to assess the impact of quantity on quality.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research Pub Date : 2024-11-28 DOI:10.1016/j.otsr.2024.104076
Francesc A Marcano-Fernández, Carlos Prada, Sheila Sprague, Sofia Bzovsky, Jodi Gallant, Gina Del Fabbro, Herman Johal
{"title":"Collection of Multiple Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (CRAM-PROMs) in orthopaedic trauma: a randomized trial to assess the impact of quantity on quality.","authors":"Francesc A Marcano-Fernández, Carlos Prada, Sheila Sprague, Sofia Bzovsky, Jodi Gallant, Gina Del Fabbro, Herman Johal","doi":"10.1016/j.otsr.2024.104076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We rely on sound clinical research to ensure the safety and effectiveness of medical interventions. We are nowadays experiencing an increased utilization of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in research, for which there is good evidence on validity and reliability. However, these measures are often validated in isolation and not in a real-life setting where they are used in conjunction with other questionnaires and measures. Our study objective was to determine if the number of PROMs questionnaires completed by fracture patients affected their reliability; more specifically, the internal consistency of the EuroQuol Five Dimension-Five Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Hypothesis: </strong>Our hypothesis was that there is a progressive decline in reliability as we increase the number of questionnaires given to participants.</p><p><strong>Patients and method: </strong>This is a randomized study carried out in a single Level I academic trauma center. Patients presenting to the fracture clinic for follow-up were screened. Participants were randomly assigned to 4 groups: group 1 only answered the EuroQol Five Dimension-Five Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire, group 2 answered one additional questionnaire before the EQ-5D-5L, group 3 answered two and group 4 answered three additional questionnaires before the EQ-5D-5L. The primary outcome measured was the internal consistency of the EQ-5D-5L as a measure of reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Enrolment was 115 participants. Twenty-eight participants were randomized to Group 1, 29 to Group 2, 29 to Group 3, and 29 to Group 4. There was a progressive decline of reliability as number of questionnaires increased except for a sudden rise in group 4. (Group 1: 0.83, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.70 to 0.91; Group 2: 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.87; Group 3: 0.68, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.83; Group 4: 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.90). Completeness was 100% for Group 1, 98.5% for Group 2, 100% for Group 3, and 92% for Group 4.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>These results cannot strongly support our initial hypothesis. Although there is an initial decrease in Cochran's alpha for Groups 2 and 3 consecutively, the sudden rise in group 4 limits the validity our results. Notwithstanding, researchers should consider these findings when designing their research trials to avoid potential misleading results. Hence, the number of given questionnaires in research should be limited in order for these to maintain their reliability.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>II.</p>","PeriodicalId":54664,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research","volume":" ","pages":"104076"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2024.104076","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: We rely on sound clinical research to ensure the safety and effectiveness of medical interventions. We are nowadays experiencing an increased utilization of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in research, for which there is good evidence on validity and reliability. However, these measures are often validated in isolation and not in a real-life setting where they are used in conjunction with other questionnaires and measures. Our study objective was to determine if the number of PROMs questionnaires completed by fracture patients affected their reliability; more specifically, the internal consistency of the EuroQuol Five Dimension-Five Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire.

Hypothesis: Our hypothesis was that there is a progressive decline in reliability as we increase the number of questionnaires given to participants.

Patients and method: This is a randomized study carried out in a single Level I academic trauma center. Patients presenting to the fracture clinic for follow-up were screened. Participants were randomly assigned to 4 groups: group 1 only answered the EuroQol Five Dimension-Five Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire, group 2 answered one additional questionnaire before the EQ-5D-5L, group 3 answered two and group 4 answered three additional questionnaires before the EQ-5D-5L. The primary outcome measured was the internal consistency of the EQ-5D-5L as a measure of reliability.

Results: Enrolment was 115 participants. Twenty-eight participants were randomized to Group 1, 29 to Group 2, 29 to Group 3, and 29 to Group 4. There was a progressive decline of reliability as number of questionnaires increased except for a sudden rise in group 4. (Group 1: 0.83, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.70 to 0.91; Group 2: 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.87; Group 3: 0.68, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.83; Group 4: 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.90). Completeness was 100% for Group 1, 98.5% for Group 2, 100% for Group 3, and 92% for Group 4.

Discussion: These results cannot strongly support our initial hypothesis. Although there is an initial decrease in Cochran's alpha for Groups 2 and 3 consecutively, the sudden rise in group 4 limits the validity our results. Notwithstanding, researchers should consider these findings when designing their research trials to avoid potential misleading results. Hence, the number of given questionnaires in research should be limited in order for these to maintain their reliability.

Level of evidence: II.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
26.10%
发文量
329
审稿时长
12.5 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research (OTSR) publishes original scientific work in English related to all domains of orthopaedics. Original articles, Reviews, Technical notes and Concise follow-up of a former OTSR study are published in English in electronic form only and indexed in the main international databases.
期刊最新文献
Collection of Multiple Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (CRAM-PROMs) in orthopaedic trauma: a randomized trial to assess the impact of quantity on quality. Is pre-operative block-test with lidocaine injection efficient in predicting the functional result of revision total hip arthroplasty? Learning curve for combined reconstruction of the anterolateral and anterior cruciate ligaments: a report of 108 cases with a single surgeon. Editorial Board Contents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1