Comparison between an electronic version of the foot and ankle outcome score and the standard paper version: A randomized multicenter study

To prove the equivalence of the Korean version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) in the printed (PFAOS) vs the electronic (EFAOS) form in a multicenter randomized study. Overall, 227 patients with ages ranging from 20 to 79 years from 16 dedicated foot and ankle centers were included. Patie...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medicine (Baltimore) 2019-10, Vol.98 (40), p.e17440-e17440
Hauptverfasser: Park, Jae Yong, Kim, Bom Soo, Lee, Hyun June, Kim, Yu Mi, Kim, Hyong Nyun, Kang, Hwa Jun, Cho, Jae Ho, Choi, SeongJu, Choi, Youngrak
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To prove the equivalence of the Korean version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) in the printed (PFAOS) vs the electronic (EFAOS) form in a multicenter randomized study. Overall, 227 patients with ages ranging from 20 to 79 years from 16 dedicated foot and ankle centers were included. Patients were randomized into either a ‘paper first’ group (P-F group, n = 113) or an ‘electronic device (tablet computer) first’ group (E-F group, n = 114). The first evaluation either by paper (P-F group) or tablet (E-F group) was followed by a second evaluation the following day. The difference between the PFAOS and EFAOS results in each group was calculated and analyzed. To evaluate the benefit of each methodology, the time consumed per evaluation was compared and patients were asked which methodology they preferred and which was the easiest to use. There were no significant differences in age or sex between the groups. An intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) value of 0.934 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.912–0.950, P  
ISSN:0025-7974
1536-5964
DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000017440