Skip to main content
main-content
Top

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

10-09-2015 | Uitgave 4/2016

Quality of Life Research 4/2016

Comparison of interactive voice response (IVR) with paper administration of instruments to assess functional status, sexual function, and quality of life in elderly men

Tijdschrift:
Quality of Life Research > Uitgave 4/2016
Auteurs:
Raymond C. Rosen, Alisa J. Stephens-Shields, Glenn R. Cunningham, Denise Cifelli, David Cella, John T. Farrar, Elizabeth Barrett-Connor, Cora E. Lewis, Marco Pahor, Xiaoling Hou, Peter J. Snyder

Abstract

Purpose

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are essential for assessing subjective patient experiences. Interactive voice response (IVR) data collection provides advantages for clinical trial design by standardizing and centralizing the assessment. Prior to adoption of IVR as a mode of PRO administration in the Testosterone Trials (TTrials), we compared IVR to paper versions of the instruments to be used.

Methods

IVR versions of the FACIT-Fatigue scale and Psychosexual Daily Questionnaire, Question 4, were developed. In one pilot study, IVR versions of these scales were compared to paper versions in 25 men ≥ 65 years at each of two clinical sites. In another study, IVR versions of the SF-36 Vitality Scale (SF-36), Positive and Negative Affect Scale, and Patient Health Questionnaire were evaluated in comparison with previously validated paper versions in 25 men at two clinical sites. Both paper and IVR versions of each instrument were administered in counterbalanced order, and test–retest reliability was evaluated by repeated administration of the test. Bland–Altman plots were used to assess the degree of agreement. Test–retest correlations for each measure were also determined.

Results

Satisfactory agreement was observed between IVR and paper versions of each study measure. Specifically, linear and highly positive associations were observed consistently across the study for IVR and paper versions of all study measures. These ranged from r = 0.91–0.99. Test–retest reliability for all measures was acceptable or better (r = 0.70–0.90).

Conclusions

The IVR versions of TTrials endpoints in these two studies performed consistently well in comparison with paper versions.

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:

BSL Podotherapeut Totaal

Binnen de bundel kunt u gebruik maken van boeken, tijdschriften, e-learnings, web-tv's en uitlegvideo's. BSL Podotherapeut Totaal is overal toegankelijk; via uw PC, tablet of smartphone.

Literatuur
Over dit artikel

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2016

Quality of Life Research 4/2016 Naar de uitgave