Abstract
BackgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) translate subjective outcomes into objective data that can be quantified and analyzed. Nevertheless, the use of PROs in their traditional paper format is not practical for clinical practice due to limitations associated with the analysis and management of the data. To address the need for a viable way to group and utilize the main functioning assessment tools in the field of musculoskeletal disorders, the Physiotherapy Questionnaires app was developed.ObjectiveThis study aims to explain the development of the app, to validate it using two questionnaires, and to analyze whether participants prefer to use the app or the paper version of the questionnaires.MethodsIn the first stage, the app for an Android operational system was developed. In the second stage, the aim was to select questionnaires that were most often used in musculoskeletal clinical practice and research. The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) questionnaire were selected to validate the app. In total, 50 participants completed the paper and app versions of the AOFAS and 50 completed the FAOS. The study’s outcomes were the correlation of the data between the paper and app versions as well as the preference of the participants between the two versions.ResultsThe app was approved by experts after the adaptations of the layout for mobile phones and a total of 18 questionnaires were included in the app. Moreover, the app allows the generation of PDF and Excel files with the patients’ data. In regards to validity, the mean of the total scores of the FAOS were 91.54% (SD 8.86%) for the paper version and 91.74% (SD 9.20%) for the app. There was no statistically significant differences in the means of the total scores or the subscales (P=.11-.94). The mean total scores for the AOFAS were 93.94 (SD 8.47) for the paper version and 93.96 (SD 8.48) for the app. No statistically significant differences were found for the total scores for the AOFAS or the subscales (P>.99). The app showed excellent agreement with the paper version of the FAOS, with an ICC value of 0.98 for the total score (95% CI 0.98-0.99), which was also found for the AOFAS with the ICC for the total score of 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-0.99). For compliance, 72% (36/50) of the participants in the FAOS group and 94% (47/50) in the AOFAS group preferred the app version.ConclusionsThe Physiotherapy Questionnaires app showed validity and high levels of compliance for the FAOS and AOFAS, which indicates it is not inferior to the paper version of these two questionnaires and confirms its viability and feasibility for use in clinical practice.
Highlights
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) [1] translate subjective outcomes, such as pain, function, daily activities, and social participation, into objective data that can be quantified and analyzed
EPROs were developed in Web platforms [7] and software programs that were accessed via personal computers [8]; mobile phones have added portability and viability to the tools used in health care
Questionnaires relating to the ankle region (AOFAS, Foot And Ankle Ability Measure, Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), Lower Extremity Functional Scale, and Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool) [18,19,20], the knee (Victoria Institute Of Sport Assessment-Patella, Knee Instability Scale Modified For Evaluation Of Patellofemoral Pain And Instability, Fulkerson Scale, Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, and Kujala Scoring Questionnaire or Anterior Knee Pain Scale) [21,22,23,24], the low back (Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire) [25], the shoulder
Summary
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) [1] translate subjective outcomes, such as pain, function, daily activities, and social participation, into objective data that can be quantified and analyzed. Objective: This study aims to explain the development of the app, to validate it using two questionnaires, and to analyze whether participants prefer to use the app or the paper version of the questionnaires. 50 participants completed the paper and app versions of the AOFAS and 50 completed the FAOS. The mean of the total scores of the FAOS were 91.54% (SD 8.86%) for the paper version and 91.74% (SD 9.20%) for the app. The mean total scores for the AOFAS were 93.94 (SD 8.47) for the paper version and 93.96 (SD 8.48) for the app. Conclusions: The Physiotherapy Questionnaires app showed validity and high levels of compliance for the FAOS and AOFAS, which indicates it is not inferior to the paper version of these two questionnaires and confirms its viability and feasibility for use in clinical practice
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
