Comparing patient-reported outcomes entered at home versus at hospital, and testing touch screens for initial recruitment to scientific trials in arthritis patients

Objectives: Touch screens for entering patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are available at all Danish departments of rheumatology reporting to the nationwide DANBIO registry. This project comprises two substudies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA), aiming to (A) investigate the feasibility of first line patient recruitment for research via touch screens, and (B) compare PROs collected at hospital versus at home, including patient preferences. Method: Substudy A: using a touch screen, patients answered whether we could contact them about a clinical research project (yes/no). Characteristics of patients who accepted/declined were explored using chi-squared and Mann–Whitney U-tests. Substudy B (randomized crossover agreement study): a random sample of patients from the accepting group in substudy A was contacted by telephone. According to prespecified power and sample size estimation, 56 patients were included. After randomization, 50% of patients entered PROs and information on comorbidities and lifestyle from home and then at hospital, and 50% first from hospital and then at home. Finally, they stated their preference for data entry (hospital/home/equally good). Differences in PROs entered from home and in the hospital were compared (limits of agreement, 95% confidence intervals, and intraclass correlation coefficients). Results: The touch-screen invitation was accepted by 428/952 patients (45%). Patients who accepted and those who declined had similar PROs and demographics. Substudy B was completed by 42 patients (22 RA, 20 AxSpA). They had no significant differences between PROs and lifestyle/comorbidity data entered from home and hospital, except for AxSpA patients on the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index item 5. The preferred method of data entry was hospital (10%), home (50%), and equally good (40%). Conclusion: Touch screens seem feasible for first line research recruitment. PROs collected from home were similar to the touch-screen solution. Patients preferred data entry from home.