TY - JOUR
T1 - Reproducibility and validity of a questionnaire filled in by spinal cord lesioned individuals before regular follow-up
AU - Biering-Sørensen, B
AU - Egebart, J
AU - Hilden, J
AU - Biering-Sørensen, F
PY - 2001/3
Y1 - 2001/3
N2 - OBJECTIVE: To speed up and focus (biennial) check-ups of out-patients with spinal cord lesions by means of a brief mail questionnaire concerning specific impairments as well as general life conditions.METHOD: A trial 69-item questionnaire was filled in twice, at home and on arrival for check-up, and, for a third time, by the physician during the consultation. Out of 115 check-ups, 107 and 105 could be included in a reproducibility and validity assessment respectively.RESULTS: Excellent agreement between the first two completions ('reproducibility') and between the markings made at home and those made by the physician ('validity') was obtained for the majority of the items. Those items not performing satisfactorily, not least those relating to defecation, were scrutinised.CONCLUSION: After revision, the questionnaire can serve the above mentioned purposes in a cost-effective and clinically satisfying manner. Further benefits are envisaged by computerised longitudinal monitoring of the patients' answers. Finally, we have pointed towards weak items/questions in our questionnaire, and we hope this can be of help to others who want to use similar questionnaires in their daily practice.
AB - OBJECTIVE: To speed up and focus (biennial) check-ups of out-patients with spinal cord lesions by means of a brief mail questionnaire concerning specific impairments as well as general life conditions.METHOD: A trial 69-item questionnaire was filled in twice, at home and on arrival for check-up, and, for a third time, by the physician during the consultation. Out of 115 check-ups, 107 and 105 could be included in a reproducibility and validity assessment respectively.RESULTS: Excellent agreement between the first two completions ('reproducibility') and between the markings made at home and those made by the physician ('validity') was obtained for the majority of the items. Those items not performing satisfactorily, not least those relating to defecation, were scrutinised.CONCLUSION: After revision, the questionnaire can serve the above mentioned purposes in a cost-effective and clinically satisfying manner. Further benefits are envisaged by computerised longitudinal monitoring of the patients' answers. Finally, we have pointed towards weak items/questions in our questionnaire, and we hope this can be of help to others who want to use similar questionnaires in their daily practice.
KW - Activities of Daily Living
KW - Defecation/physiology
KW - Follow-Up Studies
KW - Humans
KW - Reproducibility of Results
KW - Socioeconomic Factors
KW - Spinal Cord Injuries/complications
KW - Surveys and Questionnaires
KW - Urination/physiology
U2 - 10.1038/sj.sc.3101137
DO - 10.1038/sj.sc.3101137
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 11326327
SN - 1362-4393
VL - 39
SP - 161
EP - 167
JO - Spinal Cord
JF - Spinal Cord
IS - 3
ER -