The Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease 12-item questionnaire: Equivalence, reliability, validity, and feasibility of the touch-screen administration versus the paper-and-pencil version

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management

Volumn 12, Issue , 2016, Pages 631-642

  Salaffi, Fausto ^a   Di Carlo, Marco ^a   Carotti, Marina ^a   Farah, Sonia ^a   Gutierrez, Marwin ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITÀ POLITECNICA DELLE MARCHE   (Italy)

^b National Institute for Rehabilitation   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Patient reported outcomes; PsAID 12; Psoriatic arthritis; Touch screen questionnaire

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; DISEASE ACTIVITY; DISEASE DURATION; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS; PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS IMPACT OF DISEASE 12 ITEM QUESTIONNAIRE; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RELIABILITY; VALIDITY;

EID: 84964491323     PISSN: 11766336     EISSN: 1178203X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2147/TCRM.S101619     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Ibrahim G, Waxman R, Helliwell PS. The prevalence of psoriatic arthritis in people with psoriasis. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;61(10):1373–1378.
2. Salaffi F, De Angelis R, Grassi W; MArche Pain Prevalence; INvestigation Group (MAPPING) study. Prevalence of musculoskeletal conditions in an Italian population sample: results of a regional community-based study. I. The MAPPING study. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2005;23(6):819–828.
3. Gisondi P, Girolomoni G, Sampogna F, Tabolli S, Abeni D. Prevalence of psoriatic arthritis and joint complaints in a large population of Italian patients hospitalised for psoriasis. Eur J Dermatol. 2005;15(4):279–283.
4. Salvarani C, Lo Scocco G, Macchioni P, et al. Prevalence of psoriatic arthritis in Italian psoriatic patients. J Rheumatol. 1995;22(8):1499–1503.
5. Veal D, Rogers S, Fitzgerald O. Classification of clinical subsets in psoriatic arthritis. Br J Rheumatol. 1994;33(2):133–138.
6. Salaffi F, Carotti M, Gasparini S, Intorcia M, Grassi W. The health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis: a comparison with a selected sample of healthy people. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009;7:25.
7. Salaffi F, De Angelis R, Stancati A, Grassi W; MArche Pain; Prevalence INvestigation Group (MAPPING) study. Health-related quality of life in multiple musculoskeletal conditions: a cross-sectional population based epidemiological study. II. The MAPPING study. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2005;23(6):829–839.
8. Husted JA, Gladman DD, Farewell VT, Cook RJ. Health-related quality of life of patients with psoriatic arthritis: a comparison with patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2001;45(2):151–158.
9. Coates LC, Mumtaz A, Helliwell PS, et al. Development of a disease severity and responder index for psoriatic arthritis (PsA)–report of the OMERACT 10 PsA special interest group. J Rheumatol. 2011;38(7):1496–1501.
10. Gladman DD, Helliwell P, Mease PJ, Nash P, Ritchlin C, Taylor W. Assessment of patients with psoriatic arthritis: a review of currently available measures. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(1):24–35.
11. Gossec L, Paternotte S, Aanerud GJ, et al. Finalisation and validation of the rheumatoid arthritis impact of disease score, a patient-derived composite measure of impact of rheumatoid arthritis: a EULAR initiative. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(6):935–942.
12. Gossec L, de Wit M, Kiltz U, et al; for EULAR PsAID Taskforce. A patient-derived and patient-reported outcome measure for assessing psoriatic arthritis: elaboration and preliminary validation of the Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID) questionnaire, a 13-country EULAR initiative. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73(6):1012–1019.
13. Newman ED, Lerch V, Jones JB, Stewart W. Touch-screen questionnaire patient data collection in rheumatology practice: development of a highly successful system using process redesign. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2012;64(4):589–596.
14. Wilson AS, Kitas GD, Carruthers DM, et al. Computerized information-gathering in specialist rheumatology clinics: an initial evaluation of an electronic version of the Short-Form 36. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2002;41(3):268–273.
15. Salaffi F, Gasparini S, Ciapetti A, Gutierrez M, Grassi W. Usability of an innovative and interactive electronic system for collection of patient-reported data in axial spondyloarthritis: comparison with the traditional paper-administered format. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013;52(11):2062–2070.
16. Salaffi F, Gasparini S, Grassi W. The use of computer touch-screen technology for the collection of patient-reported outcome data in rheumatoid arthritis: comparison with standardized paper questionnaires. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2009;27(3):459–468.
17. Schick-Makaroff K, Molzahn A. Strategies to use tablet computers for collection of electronic patient-reported outcomes. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015;13:2.
18. Coons SJ, Gwaltney CJ, Hays RD, et al; for ISPOR ePRO Task Force. Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health. 2009;12(4):419–429.
19. Boers M, Brooks P, Strand CV, Tugwell P. The OMERACT filter for outcome measures in rheumatology. J Rheumatol. 1998;25(2):198–199.
20. Kirwan JR, Hewlett SE, Heiberg T, et al. Incorporating the patient perspective into outcome assessment in rheumatoid arthritis–progress at OMERACT 7. J Rheumatol. 2005;32(11):2250–2256.
21. Taylor W, Gladman D, Helliwell P, Marchesoni A, Mease P, Mielants H; for the CASPAR Study Group. Classification criteria for psoriatic arthritis: development of new criteria from a large international study. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54(8):2665–2673.
22. Rudwaleit M, Landewé R, van der Heijde D, et al. The development of Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis (part I): classification of paper patients by expert opinion including uncertainty appraisal. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68(6):770–776.
23. Rudwaleit M, van der Heijde D, Landewé R, et al. The development of Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis (part II): validation and final selection. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68(6):777–783.
24. Helliwell P, Marchesoni A, Peters M, Barker M, Wright V. A re-evaluation of the osteoarticular manifestations of psoriasis. Br J Rheumatol. 1991;30(5):339–345.
25. van der Linden S, Valkenburg HA, Cats A. Evaluation of diagnostic criteria for ankylosing spondylitis. A proposal for modification of the New York criteria. Arthritis Rheum. 1984;27(4):361–368.
26. Sieper J, Rudwaleit M, Baraliakos X, et al. The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) handbook: a guide to assess spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68(Suppl 2):S1–S44.
27. Gladman DD, Mease PJ, Strand V, et al. Consensus on a core set of domains for psoriatic arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2007;34(5):1167–1170.
28. Healy PJ, Helliwell PS. Measuring clinical enthesitis in psoriatic arthritis: assessment of existing measures and development of an instrument specific to psoriatic arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59(5):686–691.
29. Fries JF, Spitz P, Kraines RG, Holman HR. Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1980;23(2):137–145.
30. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual frame-work and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30(6):473–481.
31. Apolone G, Mosconi P. The Italian SF-36 Health Survey: translation, validation and norming. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):1025–1036.
32. Fredriksson T, Pettersson U. Severe psoriasis oral therapy with a new retinoid. Dermatologica. 1978;157(4):238–244.
33. Sangha O, Stucki G, Liang MH, Fossel AH, Katz JN. The Self-administered Comorbidity Questionnaire: a new method to assess comorbidity for clinical and health services research. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;49(2):156–163.
34. Eberl G, Studnicka-Benke A, Hitzelhammer H, Gschnait F, Smolen JS. Development of a disease activity index for the assessment of reactive arthritis (DAREA). Rheumatology (Oxford). 2000;39(2): 148–155.
35. Helliwell PS, Fitzgerald O, Fransen J, et al. The development of candidate composite disease activity and responder indices for psoriatic arthritis (GRACE project). Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;72(6):986–991.
36. Mease PJ. Measures of psoriatic arthritis: Tender and Swollen Joint Assessment, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI), Modified Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (mNAPSI), Mander/Newcastle Enthesitis Index (MEI), Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI), Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC), Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesis Score (MASES), Leeds Dactylitis Index (LDI), Patient Global for Psoriatic Arthritis, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life (PsAQOL), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC), Psoriatic Arthritis Joint Activity Index (PsAJAI), Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), and Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(Suppl 11):S64–S85.
37. Nell-Duxneuner VP, Stamm TA, Machold KP, Pflugbeil S, Aletaha D, Smolen JS. Evaluation of the appropriateness of composite disease activity measures for assessment of psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(3):546–549.
38. Salaffi F, Ciapetti A, Carotti M, Gasparini S, Gutierrez M. Disease activity in psoriatic arthritis: comparison of the discriminative capacity and construct validity of six composite indices in a real world. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:528105.
39. Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess. 1994;6(4):284–290.
40. Norman GR, Streiner DL. Biostatistics: The Bare Essentials. St Louis, MO: Mosby; 1994.
41. Swetz JA. Measuring accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science. 1988;240(4857):1285–1293.
42. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the area under receiver operating characteristics curves derived from the same cases. Radiology. 1983;148:839–843.
43. Gwaltney CJ, Shields AL, Shiffman S. Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review. Value Health. 2008;11(2):322–333.
44. Grenwood MC, Hakim AJ, Carson E, Doyle DV. Touch-screen computer systems in the rheumatology clinic offer a reliable and user-friendly means of collecting quality-of-life and outcome data from patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45(1):66–71.
45. Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Vondechend M, Bellamy N, Theiler R. Validation and patient acceptance of a computer touch-screen version of the WOMAC 3.1 osteoarthritis index. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64(1):80–84.
46. Richter JG, Becker A, Koch T, et al. Self-assessments of patients via Tablet PC in routine patient care: comparison with standardised paper questionnaires. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008;67(12):1739–1741.
47. Buxton J, White M, Osoba D. Patients’ experiences using a computerized program with a touch-sensitive video monitor for the assessment of health-related quality of life. Qual Life Res. 1998;7(6): 513–519.
48. Koop A, Mosges R. The use of handheld computers in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 2002;23(5):469–480.
49. Heiberg T, Kvien TK, Dale Ø, et al. Daily health status registration (patient diary) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison between personal digital assistant and paper-pencil format. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57(3):454–460.
50. Schefte DB, Hetland ML. An open-source, self-explanatory touch screen in routine care. Validity of filling in the Bath measures on Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, Function Index, the Health Assessment Questionnaire and Visual Analogue Scales in comparison with paper versions. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010;49(1):99–104.
51. Thumboo J, Wee HL, Cheung YB, et al. Computerized administration of health-related quality of life instruments compared to interviewer administration may reduce sample size requirements in clinical research: a pilot randomized controlled trial among rheumatology patients. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2007;25(4):577–583.
52. Kvien TK, Mowinckel P, Heiberg T, et al. Performance of health status measures with a pen based personal digital assistant. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64(10):1480–1484.
53. Couper MP, Rowe B. Evaluation of a computer-assisted self-interview component in a computer-assisted personal interview survey. Public Opin Q. 1996;60(1):89–105.
54. Stone A, Shiffman S, Schwartz J, Broderick J, Hufford M. Patient noncompliance with paper diaries. BMJ. 2002;324(7347):1193–1194.
55. Pouwer F, Snoek FJ, van der Ploeg HM, Heine RJ, Brand AN. A comparison of the standard and the computerized versions of the Well-being Questionnaire (WBQ) and the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ). Qual Life Res. 1998;7(1):33–38.