This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Background Comprehensive and efficient assessments are necessary for clinical care and research in chronic diseases. Our objective was to assess the implementation of a technology-enabled tool in MS practice.
Method We analyzed prospectively collected longitudinal data from routine multiple sclerosis (MS) visits between September 2015 and May 2018. The MS Performance Test, comprising patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and neuroperformance tests (NPTs) self-administered using a tablet, was integrated into routine care. Descriptive statistics, Spearman correlations, and linear mixed-effect models were used to examine the implementation process and relationship between patient characteristics and completion of assessments.
Results A total of 8022 follow-up visits from 4199 patients (median age 49.9 [40.2–58.8] years, 32.1% progressive course, and median disease duration 13.6 [5.9–22.3] years) were analyzed. By the end of integration, the tablet version of the Timed 25-Foot Walk was obtained in 89.0% of patients and the 9-Hole Peg Test in 94.8% compared with 74.2% and 64.3%, respectively before implementation. The greatest increase in data capture occurred in processing speed and low-contrast acuity assessments (0% prior vs 78.4% and 36.7%, respectively, following implementation). Four PROMs were administered in 41%–98% of patients compared with a single depression questionnaire with a previous capture rate of 70.6%. Completion rates and time required to complete each NPT improved with subsequent visits. Younger age and lower disability scores were associated with shorter completion time and higher completion rates.
Conclusions Integration of technology-enabled data capture in routine clinical practice allows acquisition of comprehensive standardized data for use in patient care and clinical research.
Footnotes
Funding information and disclosures are provided at the end of the article. Full disclosure form information provided by the authors is available with the full text of this article at Neurology.org/cp.
- Received March 13, 2019.
- Accepted June 19, 2019.
- © 2019 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
The Nerve!: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
