Acceptability of self-completion versus face-to-face use of a vertebral fragility fracture clinical decision tool for use in older people with back pain in the UK

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Tanzeela Y. Khalid, Wendy Wilmott, Clare Shere, Tim J. Peters, Sarah Drew, Zoe Paskins, Emma M. Clark
{"title":"Acceptability of self-completion versus face-to-face use of a vertebral fragility fracture clinical decision tool for use in older people with back pain in the UK","authors":"Tanzeela Y. Khalid,&nbsp;Wendy Wilmott,&nbsp;Clare Shere,&nbsp;Tim J. Peters,&nbsp;Sarah Drew,&nbsp;Zoe Paskins,&nbsp;Emma M. Clark","doi":"10.1007/s11657-025-01586-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Summary</h3><p>This study tested the agreement between self-completion and face-to-face completion of a vertebral fracture clinical decision tool called Vfrac in order to make an evidence-based recommendation of how Vfrac should be used for future research or clinical applications. Findings confirmed that it is necessary to take the physical measurements face-to-face.</p><h3>Background</h3><p>Around 12% of older adults have vertebral fragility fractures but fewer than one-third are diagnosed. Vfrac is a vertebral fracture screening tool developed to help clinicians identify which patients are at a high risk of having a vertebral fracture, so they can be referred for a spinal radiograph. The aim of this work was to assess the agreement between self-completion and face-to-face use of Vfrac and determine patient preference for use.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Adults aged &gt; 65 years who had experienced back pain in the last 4 months were invited to self-complete Vfrac and have Vfrac completed face-to-face with a healthcare professional. Agreement between low risk or high risk Vfrac scores from self-completion and face-to-face assessment was represented by Cohen’s kappa; agreement in scores was also assessed between fully face-to-face and hybrid completion of Vfrac where only physical measurements are taken face-to-face and the rest self-completed. Data on satisfaction, ease of use and preference for use was also collected.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Data from 76 participants including 58 men and 18 women who both self-completed Vfrac and had Vfrac completed face-to-face was used to compare agreement in Vfrac scores. The mean age of participants was 76.4 years (range 65–92). There was moderate agreement in Vfrac scores (kappa 0.53; 95% confidence interval 0.31–0.75) between self-completed and face-to-face completed Vfrac with varied scores for 11 participants out of 76 (14.5%).There was only slight agreement (kappa &lt; 0.2) for each of the three physical measurements between self-completed and face-to-face completed Vfrac. A moderate level of agreement (kappa 0.51) was also observed between fully face-to-face and hybrid completion of Vfrac. Thirty-seven percent of participants had no strong preference for how Vfrac should be completed, 33% preferred self-completion, and 30% preferred face-to-face completion.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study has resulted in the recommendation that future use of this tool should include completion of the physical measurements by a healthcare professional face-to-face, combined with the option of patients either self-completing the questions at home before their appointment or face-to-face at the time of the physical measurements, depending on individual preference.</p><h3>Trial registration</h3><p>ISRCTN12150779.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8283,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Osteoporosis","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12287210/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Osteoporosis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11657-025-01586-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Summary

This study tested the agreement between self-completion and face-to-face completion of a vertebral fracture clinical decision tool called Vfrac in order to make an evidence-based recommendation of how Vfrac should be used for future research or clinical applications. Findings confirmed that it is necessary to take the physical measurements face-to-face.

Background

Around 12% of older adults have vertebral fragility fractures but fewer than one-third are diagnosed. Vfrac is a vertebral fracture screening tool developed to help clinicians identify which patients are at a high risk of having a vertebral fracture, so they can be referred for a spinal radiograph. The aim of this work was to assess the agreement between self-completion and face-to-face use of Vfrac and determine patient preference for use.

Methods

Adults aged > 65 years who had experienced back pain in the last 4 months were invited to self-complete Vfrac and have Vfrac completed face-to-face with a healthcare professional. Agreement between low risk or high risk Vfrac scores from self-completion and face-to-face assessment was represented by Cohen’s kappa; agreement in scores was also assessed between fully face-to-face and hybrid completion of Vfrac where only physical measurements are taken face-to-face and the rest self-completed. Data on satisfaction, ease of use and preference for use was also collected.

Results

Data from 76 participants including 58 men and 18 women who both self-completed Vfrac and had Vfrac completed face-to-face was used to compare agreement in Vfrac scores. The mean age of participants was 76.4 years (range 65–92). There was moderate agreement in Vfrac scores (kappa 0.53; 95% confidence interval 0.31–0.75) between self-completed and face-to-face completed Vfrac with varied scores for 11 participants out of 76 (14.5%).There was only slight agreement (kappa < 0.2) for each of the three physical measurements between self-completed and face-to-face completed Vfrac. A moderate level of agreement (kappa 0.51) was also observed between fully face-to-face and hybrid completion of Vfrac. Thirty-seven percent of participants had no strong preference for how Vfrac should be completed, 33% preferred self-completion, and 30% preferred face-to-face completion.

Conclusions

This study has resulted in the recommendation that future use of this tool should include completion of the physical measurements by a healthcare professional face-to-face, combined with the option of patients either self-completing the questions at home before their appointment or face-to-face at the time of the physical measurements, depending on individual preference.

Trial registration

ISRCTN12150779.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

自我完成与面对面使用椎体脆性骨折临床决策工具在英国用于老年背痛患者的可接受性
本研究测试了一种名为Vfrac的椎体骨折临床决策工具的自我完成和面对面完成之间的一致性,以便为Vfrac在未来的研究或临床应用中应该如何使用提供循证建议。研究结果证实,面对面进行物理测量是必要的。背景:大约12%的老年人患有椎体脆性骨折,但只有不到三分之一的人被诊断出来。Vfrac是一种椎体骨折筛查工具,旨在帮助临床医生确定哪些患者有椎体骨折的高风险,以便他们可以进行脊柱x光检查。这项工作的目的是评估自我完成和面对面使用Vfrac之间的一致性,并确定患者的使用偏好。方法:邀请在过去4个月内经历过背部疼痛的年龄在bb0 ~ 65岁的成年人自行完成Vfrac,并与医疗保健专业人员面对面完成Vfrac。自我完成的低风险或高风险Vfrac评分与面对面评估的一致性用Cohen’s kappa表示;在Vfrac的完全面对面完井和混合完井(仅面对面进行物理测量,其余自行完成)之间,还评估了分数的一致性。还收集了满意度、易用性和使用偏好的数据。结果:来自76名参与者(包括58名男性和18名女性)的数据被用于比较Vfrac得分的一致性,这些参与者都是自行完成Vfrac和面对面完成Vfrac的。参与者的平均年龄为76.4岁(65-92岁)。Vfrac评分有中度一致性(kappa 0.53;(95%可信区间0.31-0.75),76名参与者中有11名(14.5%)的Vfrac得分不同。结论:该研究建议未来使用该工具时应包括由医疗保健专业人员面对面完成身体测量,并结合患者在预约前在家自行完成问题或在身体测量时面对面的选择,这取决于个人偏好。试验注册:ISRCTN12150779。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Archives of Osteoporosis
Archives of Osteoporosis ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISMORTHOPEDICS -ORTHOPEDICS
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
133
期刊介绍: Archives of Osteoporosis is an international multidisciplinary journal which is a joint initiative of the International Osteoporosis Foundation and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA. The journal will highlight the specificities of different regions around the world concerning epidemiology, reference values for bone density and bone metabolism, as well as clinical aspects of osteoporosis and other bone diseases.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信