Development and Validation of the Online Patient Satisfaction Index
NCT ID: NCT03449004
Last Updated: 2019-05-31
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
150 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2018-03-19
2019-05-15
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The conceptualization of a Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) to measure a multidimensional index score is modelled on the assumption of a causal relationship between domains of experiences with online information and patients' combined index score of satisfaction. Findings from 15 patient interviews was applied to draft the first version of the instrument. Followed by pilot testing on patients (n=20) and experts (n=7) before validating the instrument on patients (n=150). Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had their first onset of LBP for 14 days. Patients were included regardless of pain intensity. Patients were excluded if they did not have Internet access, were pregnant, did not speak Danish as their native language, or had signs of serious underlying disease.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Patient education and information is a cornerstone in the management of LBP. Providing information to patients is considered a crucial issue as it is necessary to support self-management. However, the delivery of evidence based information by a healthcare professional is time consuming and not straight forward to deliver during the available consultation time in general practice.
The internet is a widely accessible source of medical information to patients and offer a range of information provided by a variety of different sources. It has been reported that about 50% of patients use internet search for health and medical advice, and evidence suggests that patients willingness to use this source to obtain information about their health is increasing. The advance of new technologies offer new opportunities to the delivery of patient information on private computers, tablets, and smartphones. Online information can be considered an inexpensive solution to extend the combined treatment in general practice. Therefore, future optimization of information delivery has the potential to increase the delivery of evidence-based treatment of LBP which may lead to better patient outcomes. Patient satisfaction has been suggested as an important domain when evaluating the provision of online information.
Measuring patient satisfaction is a recommended outcome measure when evaluating the effect of interventions for LBP. Furthermore, patient satisfaction may be associated with compliance to the recommended treatment. Patient satisfaction is, however, rarely applied as the primary outcome in studies of LBP. To the investigators' knowledge, there exist no instrument to evaluate specific satisfaction with information delivered online for LBP. The aim of this study is to develop and validate a new questionnaire to inform about patients' satisfaction with online information for LBP.
METHODS This is a development and validation study of a patient reported questionnaire to (1) inform about the discrepancy in satisfaction of online information for LBP between groups and (2) to evaluate changes in satisfaction over time. The conceptualization is based on a formative model, which assumes a causal relationship between different domains of satisfaction with online information and the construct of patients' combined index score of satisfaction. The first version of the instrument was based on findings from an interview study among patients consulting for LBP in Danish general practice. Data for further developing on the first version were exclusively collected for piloting and validating the instrument.
HYPOTHESIS The OPSI index scores among patients categorised as promoters will be compared to the OPSI index scores of patients categorised as non-promotors on the Net Promotor Score. Based on results from the pilot test. It is hypothesised that promotors will have an OPSI score of minimum 2.5 points more than non-promotors (0-8 Points on the Net Promotor Score).
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
OTHER
CROSS_SECTIONAL
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Validation of the OPSI questionnaire
A questionnaire to measure satisfaction with online information for patients with low back pain
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* pregnant women
* not able to speak/read Danish
* spinal stenosis
* serious underlying disease for low back pain (e.g. signs of fracture, cauda equina syndrome, malignancy, osteoporosis, or spondyloarthritis)
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Aalborg University
OTHER
Aalborg University Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Allan Riis
Senior researcher
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Janus L Thomsen, PhD
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Research unit for General Practice in Aalborg, Denmark
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Research Unit for General Practice in Aalborg
Aalborg, , Denmark
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Kent PM, Keating JL. The epidemiology of low back pain in primary care. Chiropr Osteopat. 2005 Jul 26;13:13. doi: 10.1186/1746-1340-13-13.
Croft PR, Macfarlane GJ, Papageorgiou AC, Thomas E, Silman AJ. Outcome of low back pain in general practice: a prospective study. BMJ. 1998 May 2;316(7141):1356-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7141.1356.
Hoy D, Brooks P, Blyth F, Buchbinder R. The Epidemiology of low back pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2010 Dec;24(6):769-81. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2010.10.002.
Balague F, Mannion AF, Pellise F, Cedraschi C. Non-specific low back pain. Lancet. 2012 Feb 4;379(9814):482-91. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60610-7. Epub 2011 Oct 6.
National Guideline Centre (UK). Low Back Pain and Sciatica in Over 16s: Assessment and Management. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2016 Nov. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK401577/
Diaz JA, Griffith RA, Ng JJ, Reinert SE, Friedmann PD, Moulton AW. Patients' use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med. 2002 Mar;17(3):180-5. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.10603.x.
Tustin N. The role of patient satisfaction in online health information seeking. J Health Commun. 2010 Jan;15(1):3-17. doi: 10.1080/10810730903465491.
A. Riis, M. B. Jensen, A. M. Kanstrup, J. Hartvigsen, M. S. Rathleff, D. M. Hjelmager, L. D. Vinther, and P. Bertelsen, "Tailored on-line information and advice to patients with low back pain in general practice," 2016.
Deyo RA, Diehl AK. Patient satisfaction with medical care for low-back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1986 Jan-Feb;11(1):28-30. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198601000-00008.
Afzali T, Lauridsen HH, Thomsen JL, Hartvigsen J, Jensen MB, Riis A. The Online Patient Satisfaction Index for Patients With Low Back Pain: Development, Reliability, and Validation Study. JMIR Form Res. 2021 Nov 15;5(11):e21462. doi: 10.2196/21462.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
TamanaAfzali
Identifier Type: OTHER
Identifier Source: secondary_id
AllanRiis_10
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id