Cargando…

Accuracy, Validity, and Reliability of an Electronic Visual Analog Scale for Pain on a Touch Screen Tablet in Healthy Older Adults: A Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND: New technology for clinical data collection is rapidly evolving and may be useful for both researchers and clinicians; however, this new technology has not been tested for accuracy, reliability, or validity. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to test the accuracy of visual analog scale (VAS) for...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bird, Marie-Louise, Callisaya, Michele L, Cannell, John, Gibbons, Timothy, Smith, Stuart T, Ahuja, Kiran DK
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4731681/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26769149
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/ijmr.4910
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: New technology for clinical data collection is rapidly evolving and may be useful for both researchers and clinicians; however, this new technology has not been tested for accuracy, reliability, or validity. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to test the accuracy of visual analog scale (VAS) for pain on a newly designed application on the iPad (iPadVAS) and measure the reliability and validity of iPadVAS compared to a paper copy (paperVAS). METHODS: Accuracy was determined by physically measuring an iPad scale on screen and comparing it to the results from the program, with a researcher collecting 101 data points. A total of 22 healthy community dwelling older adults were then recruited to test reliability and validity. Each participant completed 8 VAS (4 using each tool) in a randomized order. Reliability was measured using interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and validity measured using Bland-Altman graphs and correlations. RESULTS: Of the measurements for accuracy, 64 results were identical, 2 results were manually measured as being 1 mm higher than the program, and 35 as 1 mm lower. Reliability for the iPadVAS was excellent with individual ICC 0.90 (95% CI 0.82-0.95) and averaged ICC 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-1.0) observed. Linear regression demonstrated a strong relationship with a small negative bias towards the iPad (−2.6, SD 5.0) with limits of agreement from −12.4 to 7.1. CONCLUSIONS: The iPadVAS provides a convenient, user-friendly, and efficient way of collecting data from participants in measuring their current pain levels. It has potential use in documentation management and may encourage participatory healthcare. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): 367297; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=367297&isReview=true (Archived by Webcite at http://www.webcitation.org/6d9xYoUbD).