scholarly journals The Sensation Meter: An Unprompted Method to Characterize Patient-Reported Bladder Sensation in Real-Time

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John E. Speich ◽  
Anna S. Nagle ◽  
Stefan G. De Wachter ◽  
Adam P. Klausner
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Bladder Function ◽  
Sensory Thresholds ◽  
Recall Bias ◽  
Episodic Information ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Bladder Sensation ◽  
Accepted Standard ◽  
Bladder Fullness ◽  
Touchscreen Device

Overactive bladder (OAB) syndrome is characterized by symptoms of urgency, with or without incontinence, usually with increased voiding frequency and nocturia [1], and is prevalent throughout the world [2]. Chronic OAB symptoms are studied with validated surveys, while acute symptoms can be assessed using bladder diaries. These methods may be subject to recall bias, since diaries are typically completed after voiding. The accepted standard for clinical assessment of bladder function and sensation is a urodynamics (UD) study which involves filling the bladder with a catheter. During a UD study, three verbal sensory thresholds (VSTs) are recorded [3]. These thresholds, First Sensation, First Desire to void, and Strong Desire to void, only provide limited, episodic information about acute sensation during filling. Thus, there is a clear need for a tool to evaluate the development of real-time bladder sensation during bladder filling. The objective of this study was to develop a novel Sensation Meter, a patient interface implemented on a touchscreen device that continuously records the patient’s real-time, unprompted sensation of bladder fullness.

Patient-Reported Outcomes: Investing in Real-Time Intervention to Improve Care

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 39-47
Author(s):  
Diane Denny ◽  
Brandon Bosch ◽  
Morgan Hannaford ◽  
Scott R Hartman
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Reported

Do Lumbar Decompression and Fusion Patients Recall Their Preoperative Status? A Cohort Study of Recall Bias in Patient-Reported Outcomes

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. S370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilyas Aleem ◽  
Jonathan S. Duncan ◽  
Amin Mohamed Ahmed ◽  
Mohammad Zarrabian ◽  
Jason C. Eck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Recall Bias ◽  
Lumbar Decompression ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Preoperative Status

scholarly journals Accuracy of patient-reported versus real-time electronic postoperative opioid use outcomes

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 100347
Author(s):  
Lori M. Schirle ◽  
Mary S. Dietrich ◽  
LeAnn Lam ◽  
Amanda L. Stone ◽  
Stephen Bruehl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Patient Reported

Implementation of Real-Time Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Heart Failure Clinic: A Feasibility Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (11) ◽  
pp. 813-816 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josef Stehlik ◽  
Carlos Rodriguez-Correa ◽  
John A. Spertus ◽  
Joshua Biber ◽  
Jose Nativi-Nicolau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Feasibility Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Heart Failure Clinic ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Time Assessment

scholarly journals Free-Living User Perspectives on Musculoskeletal Pain and Patient-Reported Mobility With Passive and Powered Prosthetic Ankle-Foot Components: A Pragmatic, Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study

2022 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Kannenberg ◽  
Arri R. Morris ◽  
Karl D. Hibler
Keyword(s):  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Knee Pain ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Rating Scales ◽  
Living Environment ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Recall Bias ◽  
Free Living ◽  
The Past ◽  
Patient Reported

IntroductionStudies with a powered prosthetic ankle-foot (PwrAF) found a reduction in sound knee loading compared to passive feet. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to determine whether anecdotal reports on reduced musculoskeletal pain and improved patient-reported mobility were isolated occurrences or reflect a common experience in PwrAF users.MethodsTwo hundred and fifty individuals with transtibial amputation (TTA) who had been fitted a PwrAF in the past were invited to an online survey on average sound knee, amputated side knee, and low-back pain assessed with numerical pain rating scales (NPRS), the PROMIS Pain Interference scale, and the PLUS-M for patient-reported mobility in the free-living environment. Subjects rated their current foot and recalled the ratings for their previous foot. Recalled scores were adjusted for recall bias by clinically meaningful amounts following published recommendations. Statistical comparisons were performed using Wilcoxon's signed rank test.ResultsForty-six subjects, all male, with unilateral TTA provided data suitable for analysis. Eighteen individuals (39%) were current PwrAF users, whereas 28 subjects (61%) had reverted to a passive foot. After adjustment for recall bias, current PwrAF users reported significantly less sound knee pain than they recalled for use of a passive foot (−0.5 NPRS, p = 0.036). Current PwrAF users who recalled sound knee pain ≥4 NPRS with a passive foot reported significant and clinically meaningful improvements in sound knee pain (−2.5 NPRS, p = 0.038) and amputated side knee pain (−3 NPRS, p = 0.042). Current PwrAF users also reported significant and clinically meaningful improvements in patient-reported mobility (+4.6 points PLUS-M, p = 0.016). Individuals who had abandoned the PwrAF did not recall any differences between the feet.DiscussionCurrent PwrAF users reported significant and clinically meaningful improvements in patient-reported prosthetic mobility as well as sound knee and amputated side knee pain compared to recalled mobility and pain with passive feet used previously. However, a substantial proportion of individuals who had been fitted such a foot in the past did not recall improvements and had reverted to passive feet. The identification of individuals with unilateral TTA who are likely to benefit from a PwrAF remains a clinical challenge and requires further research.

scholarly journals A Narrative Literature Review of Bias in Collecting Patient Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMs)

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (23) ◽  
pp. 12445
Author(s):  
Michela Luciana Luisa Zini ◽  
Giuseppe Banfi
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Response Bias ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Selection Process ◽  
Medical Specialty ◽  
Recall Bias ◽  
Language Bias ◽  
Pubmed Database ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Narrative Literature Review

There is a growing interest in the collection and use of patient reported outcomes because they not only provide clinicians with crucial information, but can also be used for economic evaluation and enable public health decisions. During the collection phase of PROMs, there are several factors that can potentially bias the analysis of PROM data. It is crucial that the collected data are reliable and comparable. The aim of this paper was to analyze the type of bias that have already been taken into consideration in the literature. A literature review was conducted by the authors searching on PubMed database, after the selection process, 24 studies were included in this review, mostly regarding orthopedics. Seven types of bias were identified: Non-response bias, collection method related bias, fatigue bias, timing bias, language bias, proxy response bias, and recall bias. Regarding fatigue bias and timing bias, only one study was found; for non-response bias, collection mode related bias, and recall bias, no agreement was found between studies. For these reasons, further research on this subject is needed in order to assess each bias type in relation to each medical specialty, and therefore find correction methods for reliable and comparable data for analysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document