Test-retest of computerized health status questionnaires frequently used in the monitoring of knee osteoarthritis: a randomized crossover trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To compare data based on touch screen to data based on traditional paper versions of questionnaires frequently used to examine patient reported outcomes in knee osteoarthritis patients and to examine the impact of patient characteristics on this comparison</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Participants were recruited from an ongoing trial (<url>http://ClinicalTrials.Gov</url> Identifier: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00655941">NCT00655941</a>). 20 female participants, mean age 67 (SD 7), completed KOOS, VAS pain, function and patient global, SF-36, Physical Activity Scale, painDETECT, and the ADL Taxonomy. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two subgroups, completing either the paper or touch screen version first. Mean, mean differences (95% CI), median, median differences and Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) were calculated for all questionnaires.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>ICCs between data based on computerized and paper versions ranged from 0.86 to 0.99. Analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between versions of the ADL Taxonomy, but not for the remaining questionnaires. Age, computer experience or education-level had no significant impact on the results. The computerized questionnaires were reported to be easier to use.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The computerized questionnaires gave comparable results to answers given on paper. Patient characteristics did not influence results and implementation was feasible.</p

The concept of physical limitations in knee osteoarthritis: as viewed by patients and health professionals

Objective: To comprehensively identify components of the physical limitation concept in knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to rate the clinical importance of these using perspectives of both patients and health professionals.Design: Concept mapping, a structured group process, was used to identify and organize data in focus groups (patients) and via a global web-based survey (professionals). Ideas were elicited through a nominal group technique and then organized using multidimensional scaling, cluster analysis, participant validation, rating of clinical importance, and thematic analyses to generate a conceptual model of physical limitations in knee OA. Results: Fifteen Danish patients and 200 international professionals contributed to generating the conceptual model. Five clusters emerged: &lsquo;Limitations/physical deficits&rsquo;; &lsquo;Everyday hurdles&rsquo;; &lsquo;You&rsquo;re not the person you used to be&rsquo;; &lsquo;Need to adjust way of living&rsquo;; and &lsquo;External limitations,&rsquo; each with sub-clusters. Patients generally found their limitations more important than the professionals did. Conclusion: Patients and professionals agreed largely on the physical limitation concept in knee OA. Some limitations of high importance to patients were lower rated by the professionals, highlighting the importance of including patients when conceptualizing patient outcomes. These data offer new knowledge to guide selection of clinically relevant outcomes and development of outcome measures in knee OA

Dynamic weight-bearing assessment of pain in knee osteoarthritis:construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretability in a research setting

BACKGROUND: The Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) has suggested to asses pain after specific activities consistently in clinical trials on knee OA. The Dynamic weight-bearing Assessment of Pain (DAP) assesses pain during activity (30 s of performing repeated deep knee-bends from a standing position). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretability of the DAP for knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: One-hundred participants with knee OA were tested twice each with the DAP, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), six-minute-walk-test (6MWT), and 6-min-walk-test with subsequent pain rating (6MWTpain), and once with a transition questionnaire (TRANS-Q) for the patient-reported change in pain after 12 weeks of exercise. Construct validity (baseline-scores) and responsiveness (change-scores) were estimated by Spearman Correlation Coefficients. We hypothesized that no correlations would be excellent (<0.7) (divergent validity), except for the 6MWTpain (convergent validity). The TRANS-Q was used for interpreting the DAP change-scores in terms of responsiveness and Minimal Important Change (MIC). RESULTS: Divergent validity with the KOOS subscales (r = −0.31 to–0.45) and the 6MWT (r = −0.25) was supported. Convergent validity with the 6MWTpain was not supported (r = 0.54). The DAP change-scores corresponded to patient-reported change in pain (TRANS-Q), while correlations with change-scores on the other instruments were <0.35. The MIC was 2.4 DAP points. CONCLUSIONS: The DAP possesses divergent validity compared to other instruments for knee OA, supporting the potential for this new way of assessing pain directly during activity. Importantly, the DAP change-scores correspond to patient-reported changes in pain, showing responsiveness. A change of 2.4 or more can be interpreted as clinically relevant. The DAP is a promising alternative to using ‘pain on walking’ as a clinical trial inclusion criterion/outcome

Development of a danish language version of the manchester foot pain and disability index:reproducibility and construct validity testing

Introduction. The Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index (MFPDI) is a 19-item questionnaire for the assessment of disability caused by foot pain. The aim was to develop a Danish language version of the MFPDI (MFPDI-DK) and evaluate its reproducibility and construct validity. Methods. A Danish version was created, following a forward-backward translation procedure. A sample of 84 adult patients with foot pain was recruited. Participants completed two copies of the MFPDI-DK within a 24- to 48-hour interval, along with the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36), and a pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Reproducibility was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% limits of agreement (Bland-Altman plot). Construct validity was evaluated with Pearson's Rho, using a priori hypothesized correlations with SF-36 subscales and VAS(mean). Results. The MFPDI-DK showed very good reliability with an ICC of 0.92 (0.88–0.95). The 95% limits of agreement ranged from −6.03 to 6.03 points. Construct validity was supported by moderate to very strong correlations with the SF-36 physical subscales and VAS(mean). Conclusion. The MFPDI-DK appears to be a valid and reproducible instrument in evaluating foot-pain-related disability in Danish adult patients in cross-sectional samples. Further research is needed to test the responsiveness of the MFPDI-DK

Effect of immersive virtual reality-based cognitive remediation in patients with mood or psychosis spectrum disorders: study protocol for a randomized, controlled, double-blinded trial

Abstract Background Cognitive impairments are prevalent across mood disorders and psychosis spectrum disorders, but there is a lack of real-life-like cognitive training programmes. Fully immersive virtual reality has the potential to ensure motivating and engaging cognitive training directly relevant to patients’ daily lives. We will examine the effect of a 4-week, intensive virtual reality-based cognitive remediation programme involving daily life challenges on cognition and daily life functioning in patients with mood disorders or psychosis spectrum disorders and explore the neuronal underpinnings of potential treatment efficacy. Methods The trial has a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, parallel-group design. We will include 66 symptomatically stable outpatients with mood disorders or psychosis spectrum disorders aged 18–55 years with objective and subjective cognitive impairment. Assessments encompassing a virtual reality test of daily life cognitive skills, neuropsychological testing, measures of daily life functioning, symptom ratings, questionnaires on subjective cognitive complaints, and quality of life are carried out at baseline, after the end of 4 weeks of treatment and at a 3-month follow-up after treatment completion. Functional magnetic resonance imaging scans are performed at baseline and at the end of treatment. The primary outcome is a broad cognitive composite score comprising five subtasks on a novel ecologically valid virtual reality test of daily life cognitive functions. Two complete data sets for 54 patients will provide a power of 80% to detect a clinically relevant between-group difference in the primary outcome. Behavioural data will be analysed using linear mixed models in SPSS, while MRI data will be analysed with the FMRIB Expert Analysis Tool (FEAT). Treatment-related changes in neural activity from baseline to end of treatment will be investigated for the dorsal prefrontal cortex and hippocampus as the regions of interest. Discussion The results will provide insight into whether virtual reality-based cognitive remediation has beneficial effects on cognition and functioning in symptomatically stable patients with mood disorders or psychosis spectrum disorders, which can aid future treatment development. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06038955. Registered on September 15, 2023