Search

Electronic data collection for monitoring pain has become increasingly popular in clinical research. However, no direct comparison has been made between electronic diaries and self-report paper diaries or phone interviews. We asked 36 patients with chronic low back pain to monitor their pain for 1 year; 20 of them used both a palmtop computer and paper diaries, and 16 used paper diaries alone. All patients were called once a week and asked to rate their pain. Regression analyses with a measurement error model were run on hourly pain scores recorded by both palmtop computer and paper diaries. Ratings of pain intensity were highly reliable between data recorded with a palmtop computer and with data from paper diaries. Patients who monitored their pain with the palmtop computer entered data on average 6.75 times a week and were 89.9% compliant with daily monitoring throughout the year. Two-way messaging available through the palmtop computer seemed to encourage continued use of the device. Internal consistency of reporting and correlations with phone reports and standardized measures were highly significant, suggesting that data from electronic diaries are both reliable and valid. Patients using electronic diaries preferred them to paper diaries and showed much higher rates of compliance and satisfaction over the 1-year trial.

Study Design: Cross-sectional study.Objective: To investigate the equivalence of electronic and paper version of self-report questionnaires for the assessment of disability, pain, fear of movement, depression, and physical activity of patients with chronic low back pain (LBP).Summary Of Background Data: Paper and electronic versions of self-report questionnaires are commonly used for assessment of patients with LBP. However, the equivalence of self-report questionnaires commonly used for assessment of patients with chronic LBP remains unclear.Methods: Seventy-nine individuals with chronic LBP seeking physiotherapy care were recruited. Participants attended the clinic twice with an interval of 1 week and completed the self-reported questionnaires in a random order. The following questionnaires were administered: Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ); 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS); Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK); Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CES-D), and Baecke Habitual Physical Activity Questionnaire (BPAQ). To investigate the equivalence between the two questionnaire versions, intraclass correlation coefficient with 95% confidence interval and Bland-Altman plotting was used.Results: The paper and electronic versions of the RMDQ, TSK, and CES-D showed good reliability and the showed moderate reliability. In contrast, the NRS showed poor reliability between the electronic and paper versions.Conclusion: Our findings support that the electronic version of the RMDQ, TSK, CES-D, and BPAQ can be administered in clinical and research settings for assessment of patients with chronic LBP. Nevertheless, electronic version of the NRS for assessment of pain intensity should not be used interchangeably in clinical practice in patients with chronic LBP.Level Of Evidence: 3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]