POSAS、EQ-5D和DLQI的电子和纸质版本的测量等效性和可行性:一项随机交叉试验。

IF 1 Q4 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Jill Meirte, Nick Hellemans, Ulrike Van Daele, Koen Maertens, Lenie Denteneer, Mieke Anthonissen, Peter Moortgat
{"title":"POSAS、EQ-5D和DLQI的电子和纸质版本的测量等效性和可行性:一项随机交叉试验。","authors":"Jill Meirte, Nick Hellemans, Ulrike Van Daele, Koen Maertens, Lenie Denteneer, Mieke Anthonissen, Peter Moortgat","doi":"10.3390/ebj5040030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are crucial within person-centered care. The use of electronic PROMs (ePROMs) is increasing and multiple advantages have been described. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is a validated paper questionnaire to assess patient-reported scar quality in the burn and scar population. In burn and scar rehabilitation, quality of life questionnaires such as the Euroqol 5 Dimensions 5 level (EQ-5D-5L) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) allow us to measure physical and psychosocial impact. The goal of this research was to compare the equivalence of the electronic versions of the POSAS, the EQ-5D-5L, and the DLQI with their original paper counterparts. To ensure the psychometric properties of the electronic versions, we assessed the equivalence of scores, the differences in completion time, and patients' preferred mode and ease of use. We used a randomized crossover design using a within-subject comparison of the formats of the questionnaires. Participants aged over 18 with a scar were recruited from an outpatient after-care and research center for burns and scars in Antwerp, Belgium. The equivalence of the electronic questionnaires POSAS, EQ-5D-5L, and DLQI is assumed based on the findings of this study. Completion times were faster for all the electronic versions but only statistically different (<i>p</i> = 0.002) for the electronic version of the EQ-5D-5L. The number of missing answers could be reduced to 0. The electronic assessment was preferred in >75% of the cases and subjects found it easy to use, and a tool that could improve the quality of care. Our findings support the electronic delivery of POSAS, EQ-5D, and DLQI, within the burn and scar population.</p>","PeriodicalId":72961,"journal":{"name":"European burn journal","volume":"5 4","pages":"321-334"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11727002/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measurement Equivalence and Feasibility of the Electronic and Paper Versions of the POSAS, EQ-5D, and DLQI: A Randomized Crossover Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Jill Meirte, Nick Hellemans, Ulrike Van Daele, Koen Maertens, Lenie Denteneer, Mieke Anthonissen, Peter Moortgat\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/ebj5040030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are crucial within person-centered care. The use of electronic PROMs (ePROMs) is increasing and multiple advantages have been described. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is a validated paper questionnaire to assess patient-reported scar quality in the burn and scar population. In burn and scar rehabilitation, quality of life questionnaires such as the Euroqol 5 Dimensions 5 level (EQ-5D-5L) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) allow us to measure physical and psychosocial impact. The goal of this research was to compare the equivalence of the electronic versions of the POSAS, the EQ-5D-5L, and the DLQI with their original paper counterparts. To ensure the psychometric properties of the electronic versions, we assessed the equivalence of scores, the differences in completion time, and patients' preferred mode and ease of use. We used a randomized crossover design using a within-subject comparison of the formats of the questionnaires. Participants aged over 18 with a scar were recruited from an outpatient after-care and research center for burns and scars in Antwerp, Belgium. The equivalence of the electronic questionnaires POSAS, EQ-5D-5L, and DLQI is assumed based on the findings of this study. Completion times were faster for all the electronic versions but only statistically different (<i>p</i> = 0.002) for the electronic version of the EQ-5D-5L. The number of missing answers could be reduced to 0. The electronic assessment was preferred in >75% of the cases and subjects found it easy to use, and a tool that could improve the quality of care. Our findings support the electronic delivery of POSAS, EQ-5D, and DLQI, within the burn and scar population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72961,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European burn journal\",\"volume\":\"5 4\",\"pages\":\"321-334\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11727002/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European burn journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/ebj5040030\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European burn journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ebj5040030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)在以人为本的护理中至关重要。电子prom (eprom)的使用正在增加,并且已经描述了多种优点。患者和观察者疤痕评估量表(POSAS)是一份经过验证的纸质问卷,用于评估烧伤和疤痕人群中患者报告的疤痕质量。在烧伤和疤痕康复中,生活质量问卷,如Euroqol 5维5水平(EQ-5D-5L)和皮肤病生活质量指数(DLQI)使我们能够测量身体和心理社会的影响。本研究的目的是比较电子版本的POSAS, EQ-5D-5L和DLQI与原始纸质版本的等效性。为了确保电子版的心理测量特性,我们评估了分数的等效性、完成时间的差异、患者的首选模式和易用性。我们采用随机交叉设计,对问卷的格式进行主题内比较。年龄在18岁以上、有疤痕的参与者是从比利时安特卫普一家烧伤和疤痕门诊后护理和研究中心招募的。电子问卷POSAS、EQ-5D-5L和DLQI的等效性是基于本研究的发现。所有电子版本的完成时间都更快,但只有EQ-5D-5L的电子版本有统计学差异(p = 0.002)。缺失答案的数量可以减少到0。75%的病例和受试者认为电子评估易于使用,并且是一种可以提高护理质量的工具。我们的研究结果支持POSAS、EQ-5D和DLQI在烧伤和疤痕人群中的电子传递。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Measurement Equivalence and Feasibility of the Electronic and Paper Versions of the POSAS, EQ-5D, and DLQI: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are crucial within person-centered care. The use of electronic PROMs (ePROMs) is increasing and multiple advantages have been described. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is a validated paper questionnaire to assess patient-reported scar quality in the burn and scar population. In burn and scar rehabilitation, quality of life questionnaires such as the Euroqol 5 Dimensions 5 level (EQ-5D-5L) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) allow us to measure physical and psychosocial impact. The goal of this research was to compare the equivalence of the electronic versions of the POSAS, the EQ-5D-5L, and the DLQI with their original paper counterparts. To ensure the psychometric properties of the electronic versions, we assessed the equivalence of scores, the differences in completion time, and patients' preferred mode and ease of use. We used a randomized crossover design using a within-subject comparison of the formats of the questionnaires. Participants aged over 18 with a scar were recruited from an outpatient after-care and research center for burns and scars in Antwerp, Belgium. The equivalence of the electronic questionnaires POSAS, EQ-5D-5L, and DLQI is assumed based on the findings of this study. Completion times were faster for all the electronic versions but only statistically different (p = 0.002) for the electronic version of the EQ-5D-5L. The number of missing answers could be reduced to 0. The electronic assessment was preferred in >75% of the cases and subjects found it easy to use, and a tool that could improve the quality of care. Our findings support the electronic delivery of POSAS, EQ-5D, and DLQI, within the burn and scar population.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信