Osteoarthritis Index delivered by mobile phone (m-WOMAC) is valid, reliable, and responsive.

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the validity, reliability, responsiveness, and mode preference of electronic data capture (EDC) using the Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) numerical rating scale (NRS) 3.1 Osteoarthritis (OA) Index on Motorola V3 mobile phones. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Patients with OA undergoing hip or knee joint replacement were assessed preoperatively and 3-4 months postoperatively, completing the WOMAC Index in paper (p-WOMAC) and electronic (m-WOMAC) format in random order. RESULTS Data were successfully and securely transmitted from patients in Australia to a server in the United States. Pearson correlations between the summated total index scores (TISs) for the p-WOMAC and m-WOMAC pre- and postsurgery were 0.98 and 0.99 (P<0.0001). There were no clinically important or statistically significant between-method differences in the adjusted total summated scores, pre- and postsurgery (adjusted mean differences=4.44, P=0.474 and 1.73, P=0.781, respectively). Internal consistency estimates of m-WOMAC reliability were 0.87-0.98. The m-WOMAC detected clinically important, statistically significant (P<0.0001) improvements in pain, stiffness, function, and TIS. No statistically significant differences in mode preference were detected. CONCLUSIONS There was close agreement and no significant differences between m-WOMAC and p-WOMAC scores. This study confirms the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Exco InTouch-engineered, Java-based m-WOMAC Index application. EDC with the m-WOMAC Index provides unique opportunities for using quantitative measurement in clinical research and practice.

[1]  N. Bellamy,et al.  Clinical evaluation of the WOMAC 3.0 OA Index in numeric rating scale format using a computerized touch screen version. , 2002, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[2]  R Stratton,et al.  The use of visual analogue scales to assess motivation to eat in human subjects: a review of their reliability and validity with an evaluation of new hand-held computerized systems for temporal tracking of appetite ratings , 2000, British Journal of Nutrition.

[3]  N. Bellamy,et al.  Responsiveness of the electronic touch screen WOMAC 3.1 OA Index in a short term clinical trial with rofecoxib. , 2004, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[4]  C. Bombardier,et al.  Evaluation of clinically relevant states in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the patient acceptable symptom state , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[5]  P. Tugwell,et al.  BLISS index using WOMAC index detects between-group differences at low-intensity symptom states in osteoarthritis. , 2010, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[6]  J. Hardin,et al.  Generalized Linear Models and Extensions , 2001 .

[7]  R. Littell.  SAS System for Mixed Models , 1996 .

[8]  N. Bellamy,et al.  The WOMAC Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis Indices: development, validation, globalization and influence on the development of the AUSCAN Hand Osteoarthritis Indices. , 2005, Clinical and experimental rheumatology.

[9]  A Abayomi,et al.  Wireless networks for surveillance, data capture and data management in the human immunodeficiency virus epidemic care and treatment programmes. , 2006, African journal of medicine and medical sciences.

[10]  Mikael Palmblad,et al.  Electronic diaries and questionnaires: Designing user interfaces that are easy for all patients to use , 2004, Quality of Life Research.

[11]  N. Bolger,et al.  Diary methods: capturing life as it is lived. , 2003, Annual review of psychology.

[12]  A. Gasbarrini,et al.  H pylori re-infection in type 1 diabetes: a 5 years follow-up. , 2007, Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver.

[13]  N. Bellamy,et al.  Validation study of WOMAC : a health status instrument for measuring clinically-important patient-relevant outcomes following total hip or knee arthroplasty in osteoarthritis , 1988 .

[14]  N. Bellamy,et al.  A comparative study of telephone versus onsite completion of the WOMAC 3.0 osteoarthritis index. , 2002, The Journal of rheumatology.

[15]  N. Bellamy,et al.  Validation and patient acceptance of a computer touch screen version of the WOMAC 3.1 osteoarthritis index , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[16]  P. Tugwell,et al.  BLISS index for analyzing knee osteoarthritis trials data. , 2007, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[17]  G. Stucki,et al.  Comparison of the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) osteoarthritis index and a self-report format of the self-administered Lequesne-Algofunctional index in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis. , 1998, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[18]  C. Bombardier,et al.  Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[19]  S. Dennison,et al.  Electronic Data Capture (EDC) using cellular technology: Implications for clinical trials and practice, and preliminary experience with the m-Womac® Index in hip and knee OA patients , 2009, Inflammopharmacology.

[20]  M. Dougados,et al.  OMERACT-OARSI initiative: Osteoarthritis Research Society International set of responder criteria for osteoarthritis clinical trials revisited. , 2004, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[21]  C. Goldsmith,et al.  Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. , 1988, The Journal of rheumatology.

[22]  J. Kellgren,et al.  Radiological Assessment of Osteo-Arthrosis , 1957, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[23]  N. Bellamy,et al.  International estimation of Patient Acceptable Symptom Severity (PASS75): The Reflect Study , 2007 .

[24]  N. Bellamy,et al.  Minimal perceptible clinical improvement with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index questionnaire and global assessments in patients with osteoarthritis. , 2000, The Journal of rheumatology.

[25]  N. Bellamy,et al.  Validation study of a computerized version of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities VA3.0 Osteoarthritis Index. , 1997, The Journal of rheumatology.

[26]  Ingela Wiklund,et al.  Symptom recording in a randomised clinical trial: paper diaries vs. electronic or telephone data capture. , 2004, Controlled clinical trials.

[27]  P. Tugwell,et al.  The effectiveness of hylan G-F 20 in patients with knee osteoarthritis: an application of two sets of response criteria developed by the OARSI and one set developed by OMERACT-OARSI. , 2005, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[28]  S. Shiffman,et al.  Patient compliance with paper and electronic diaries. , 2003, Controlled clinical trials.

[29]  O. Dale,et al.  Despite technical problems personal digital assistants outperform pen and paper when collecting patient diary data. , 2007, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[30]  G. Drummond,et al.  Assessment of postsurgical recovery after discharge using a pen computer diary * , 2003, Anaesthesia.

[31]  B. Koes,et al.  Prognostic factors in adults with knee pain in general practice. , 2007, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[32]  M. Dougados,et al.  Response criteria for clinical trials on osteoarthritis of the knee and hip: a report of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International Standing Committee for Clinical Trials response criteria initiative. , 2000, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[33]  Holly Blake,et al.  Innovation in practice: mobile phone technology in patient care. , 2008, British journal of community nursing.

[34]  T. Kvien,et al.  Performance of health status measures with a pen based personal digital assistant , 2005, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[35]  Jh. Kellgren.  Radiological assessment of osteoarthrosis , 1957 .

[36]  P Wright,et al.  Computer anxiety: a comparison of pen-based personal digital assistants, conventional computer and paper assessment of mood and performance. , 1998, British journal of psychology.

[37]  B. Tiplady,et al.  Validity and sensitivity of a pen computer battery of performance tests , 2001, Journal of psychopharmacology.

[38]  G. Stucki,et al.  Superior responsiveness of the pain and function sections of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) as compared to the Lequesne-Algofunctional Index in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. , 1999, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[39]  P. Tugwell,et al.  Evaluation of WOMAC 20, 50, 70 response criteria in patients treated with hylan G-F 20 for knee osteoarthritis , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[40]  Bryant T Karras,et al.  Mobile eHealth Interventions for Obesity: A Timely Opportunity to Leverage Convergence Trends , 2005, Journal of medical Internet research.

[41]  N. Bellamy,et al.  Osteoarthritis Measurement in Routine Rheumatology Outpatient Practice (OMIRROP) in Australia: A Survey of Practice Style, Instrument Use, Responder Criteria, and State-Attainment Criteria , 2009, The Journal of Rheumatology.

[42]  N. Graves,et al.  The cost-effectiveness of routine follow-up after primary total hip arthroplasty. , 2010, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[43]  R. Korpela,et al.  An electronic diary versus a paper diary in measuring gastrointestinal symptoms. , 2007, Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver.