Optimizing patient-reported outcome and risk factor reporting from cancer survivors: a randomized trial of four different survey methods among colorectal cancer survivors.
ABSTRACT: The goal of this study was to determine response rates and associated costs of different survey methods among colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors.We assembled a cohort of 16,212 individuals diagnosed with CRC (2010-2014) from six health plans, and randomly selected 4000 survivors to test survey response rates across four mixed-mode survey administration protocols (in English and Spanish): arm 1, mailed survey with phone follow-up; arm 2, interactive voice response (IVR) followed by mail; arm 3; email linked to web-based survey with mail follow-up; and arm 4, email linked to web-based survey followed by IVR.Our overall response rate was 50.2%. Arm 1 had the highest response rate (59.9%), followed by arm 3 (51.9%), arm 2 (51.2%), and arm 4 (37.9%). Response rates were higher among non-Hispanic whites in all arms than other racial/ethnic groups (p < 0.001), among English (51.5%) than Spanish speakers (36.4%) (p < 0.001), and among higher (53.7%) than lower (41.4%) socioeconomic status (p < 0.001). Survey arms were roughly comparable in cost, with a difference of only 8% of total costs between the most (arm 2) and least (arm 3) expensive arms.Mailed surveys followed by phone calls achieved the highest response rate; email invitations and online surveys cost less per response. Electronic methods, even among those with email availability, may miss important populations including Hispanics, non-English speakers, and those of lower socioeconomic status.Our results demonstrate effective methods for capturing patient-reported outcomes, inform the relative benefits/disadvantages of the different methods, and identify future research directions.
Project description:Introduction:The patient portal may be an effective method for administering surveys regarding participant research experiences but has not been systematically studied. Methods:We evaluated 4 methods of delivering a research participant perception survey: mailing, phone, email, and patient portal. Participants of research studies were identified (n=4013) and 800 were randomly selected to receive a survey, 200 for each method. Outcomes included response rate, survey completeness, and cost. Results:Among those aged <65 years, response rates did not differ between mail, phone, and patient portal (22%, 29%, 30%, p>0.07). Among these methods, the patient portal was the lowest-cost option. Response rates were significantly lower using email (10%, p<0.01), the lowest-cost option. In contrast, among those aged 65+ years, mail was superior to the electronic methods (p<0.02). Conclusions:The patient portal was among the most effective ways to reach research participants, and was less expensive than surveys administered by mail or telephone.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:In order to address health disparities, it is important to understand how vulnerable individuals seek information. This study used an adapted version of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) administered in English, Spanish, and Chinese to describe the behaviors and preferences of a diverse group of vulnerable urban residents. METHODS:We administered a modified HINTS survey in English, Spanish, and Chinese and used purposive sampling to ensure 50% were non-English speakers evenly divided between Spanish and Chinese speakers, and 50% of English-speakers identified as Black. We used multivariable logistic regression to determine characteristics associated with sources used for health information and preferences for delivery of health information. RESULTS:Among 1027survey respondents (514 English, 256 Spanish, 260 Chinese), 55% had adequate health literacy, and 50% reported household income <$20,000, but 77% reported owning a smartphone. A plurality sought health information on the Internet (39%) or from a health care provider (36%). In multivariable analyses, smartphone ownership predicted higher odds of seeking health information on the Internet [odds ratio, (OR) 2.98; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.81-4.91]. Participants most preferred email (41%) and brochures (40%) for delivery of health information, but non-English survey respondents were less likely to prefer email: Spanish (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.11-0.83) and Chinese (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.09-0.71). Smartphone ownership predicted an email preference (OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.43-3.36). CONCLUSIONS:Among vulnerable populations, smartphone ownership and language preferences impact preferences for seeking and receiving health information. These preferences need to be considered in designing health messages.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to compare response rates, respondents' characteristics, and substantive results for CAHPS surveys administered using web and mail protocols. DATA SOURCES:Patients who had one or more primary care visits in the preceding 6 months. STUDY DESIGN/DATA COLLECTION METHODS:Patients for whom primary care practices had email addresses were randomized to one of four survey administration protocols: web via a portal invitation; web via an email invitation; combination of web and mail; and mail only. Another sample of patients without known email addresses was surveyed by mail. Samples of nonrespondents to the Internet and mail protocols were surveyed by telephone. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Response rates to surveys administered using the Internet protocols were lower than for the surveys administered by mail (20 percent vs over 40 percent). However, characteristics of respondents and survey answers were very similar across protocols. Respondents without email addresses were older, less educated, and more likely to be male than those with email addresses, and there were a few differences in their responses. There was little evidence of nonresponse bias in either the mail or web protocols. CONCLUSION:In this well-educated patient population, web protocols had lower response rates, but substantive results very similar to those from mail protocols.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>A growing number of health care practices are adopting software systems that link with their existing electronic medical records to generate outgoing phone calls, emails, or text notifications to patients for appointment reminders or practice updates. While practices are adopting this software technology for service notifications to patients, its use for collection of patient-reported measures is still nascent.<h4>Objective</h4>This study assessed the mode preferences, response rates, and mode effect for a practice-based automated patient survey using phone and email modalities to patients of primary care practices.<h4>Methods</h4>This cross-sectional study analyzed responses and respondent demographics for a short, fully automated, telephone or email patient survey sent to individuals within 72 hours of a visit to their regular primary care practice. Each survey consisted of 5 questions drawn from a larger study's patient survey that all respondents completed in the waiting room at the time of their visit. Automated patient survey responses were linked to self-reported sociodemographic information provided on the waiting room survey including age, sex, reported income, and health status.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 871 patients from 87 primary care practices in British Columbia, Ontario, and Nova Scotia, Canada, agreed to the automated patient survey and 470 patients (45.2%) completed all 5 questions on the automated survey. Email administration of the follow-up survey was preferred over phone-based administration, except among patients aged 75 years and older (P<.001). Overall, response rates for those who selected an emailed survey (369/606, 60.9%) were higher (P<.001) than those who selected the phone survey (101/265, 38.1%). This held true irrespective of age, sex, or chronic disease status of individuals. Response rates were also higher for email (range 57.4% [58/101] to 66.3% [108/163]) compared with phone surveys (range 36% [23/64] to 43% [10/23]) for all income groups except the lowest income quintile, which had similar response rates (email: 29/63, 46%; phone: 23/50, 46%) for phone and email modes. We observed moderate (range 64.6% [62/96] to 78.8% [282/358]) agreement between waiting room survey responses and those obtained in the follow-up automated survey. However, overall agreement in responses was poor (range 45.3% [43/95] to 46.2% [43/93]) for 2 questions relating to care coordination.<h4>Conclusions</h4>An automated practice-based patient experience survey achieved significantly different response rates between phone and email and increased response rates for email as income group rose. Potential mode effects for the different survey modalities may limit multimodal survey approaches. An automated minimal burden patient survey could facilitate the integration of patient-reported outcomes into care planning and service organization, supporting the move of our primary care practices toward a more responsive, patient-centered, continual learning system. However, practices must be attentive to furthering inequities in health care by underrepresenting the experience of certain groups in decision making based on the reach of different survey modes.
Project description:<h4>Objective</h4>Spanish-preferring Medicare beneficiaries are underrepresented in national patient experience surveys. We test a method for improving their representation via higher response rates.<h4>Data sources/study setting</h4>2009-2010 Medicare CAHPS surveys; Medicare population.<h4>Study design</h4>We used surname and address to predict Spanish-language preference for a national sample of 177 139 beneficiaries. We randomized half of the 10 000 non-Puerto Rico beneficiaries with the highest predicted probabilities of Spanish preference (>10 percent) to bilingual mailings (intervention) and half to standard English-only mailings (control).<h4>Data collection</h4>Medicare CAHPS Survey data were collected through mail surveys with telephone follow-up of nonrespondents.<h4>Principal findings</h4>Mail response rate was higher for intervention (28.7 percent) than control (23.9 percent) (P < 0.0001); phone response rates among mail nonrespondents were similar in intervention and control arms (15.8 percent vs 15.7 percent, P = 0.90). Targeted bilingual mailings induced 6.5 percent of those who would not have responded to respond by mail and 54.0 percent of those who would have responded in English to respond in Spanish. Beneficiaries with greater Spanish probabilities showed greater increases in response rates, a higher proportion of responses in Spanish, and lower control response rates among.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Targeted bilingual mailing of mixed-mode surveys using commonly available surname and address information can efficiently increase representation of this underrepresented group.
Project description:BACKGROUND: Low survey response rates in general practice are common and lead to loss of power, selection bias, unexpected budgetary constraints and time delays in research projects. METHODS: OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of recruitment strategies aimed at increasing survey response rates among GPs. DESIGN: Systematic review. SEARCH METHODS: MEDLINE (OVIDSP, 1948-2012), EMBASE (OVIDSP, 1980-2012), Evidence Based Medicine Reviews (OVIDSP, 2012) and references of included papers were searched. Major search terms included GPs, recruitment strategies, response rates, and randomised controlled trials (RCT). SELECTION CRITERIA: Cluster RCTs, RCTs and factorial trial designs that evaluate recruitment strategies aimed at increasing GP survey response rates. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Abstracts identified by the search strategy were reviewed and relevant articles were retrieved. Each full-text publication was examined to determine whether it met the predetermined inclusion criteria. Data extraction and study quality was assessed by using predetermined checklists. RESULTS: Monetary and nonmonetary incentives were more effective than no incentive with monetary incentives having a slightly bigger effect than nonmonetary incentives. Large incentives were more effective than small incentives, as were upfront monetary incentives compared to promised monetary incentives. Postal surveys were more effective than telephone or email surveys. One study demonstrated that sequentially mixed mode (online survey followed by a paper survey with a reminder) was more effective than an online survey or the combination of an online and paper survey sent similtaneously in the first mail out. Pre-contact with a phonecall from a peer, personalised packages, sending mail on Friday, and using registered mail also increased response rates in single studies. Pre-contact by letter or postcard almost reached statistical signficance. CONCLUSIONS: GP survey response rates may improve by using the following strategies: monetary and nonmonetary incentives, larger incentives, upfront monetary incentives, postal surveys, pre-contact with a phonecall from a peer, personalised packages, sending mail on Friday, and using registered mail. Mail pre-contact may also improve response rates and have low costs. Improved reporting and further trials, including sequential mixed mode trials and social media, are required to determine the effectiveness of recruitment strategies on GPs' response rates to surveys.
Project description:Recruiting children and families for research studies can be challenging, and re-recruiting former participants for longitudinal research can be even more difficult, especially when a study was not prospectively designed to encompass continuous data collection. In this article, we explain how researchers can set up initial studies to potentially facilitate later waves of data collection; locate former study participants using newer, often digital, tools; schedule families using recruitment phone/email/mail scripts that highlight the many benefits to continued study participation; and confirm appointments with other digital tools. We draw from prior methodological and longitudinal pieces to provide suggestions to others wishing to re-recruit families for longitudinal studies. In addition, we draw upon our own experience conducting a non-prospective longitudinal study 6 years after an educational intervention, in which we successfully re-located 122 (90%) and interviewed 101 of 136 (83% of the located sample and 74% of the full original sample) parents and their early adolescent children. Although the majority of participants were recruited via original contact information (especially phone numbers), using a range of strategies to recruit (e.g., search engines focused on contact information, social media) and motivate participation (e.g., multifaceted phone/email/mail scheduling scripts, flexibility in location and means of participation) yielded a more desirable sample size at relatively low costs.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To test a scalable health system intervention to improve long term adherence to secondary prevention treatments among patients who have had a recent myocardial infarction. DESIGN:Three arm, pragmatic randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment. SETTING:Nine cardiac centres in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS:2632 patients with obstructive coronary artery disease after a myocardial infarction, identified from a centralised cardiac registry. INTERVENTIONS:Participants were randomised 1:1:1 to receive usual care, five mail-outs developed through a user centred design process, or mail-outs plus phone calls. The phone calls were delivered first by an interactive automated system to screen for non-adherence to treatment. Trained lay health workers followed up as necessary. Interventions were coordinated centrally but delivered from each patient's hospital site. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Co-primary outcomes were completion of cardiac rehabilitation and adherence to recommended medication. Data were collected by blinded assessors through patient report and from administrative health databases at 12 months. RESULTS:2632 patients (mean age 66, 71% male) were randomised: 878 to the full intervention (mail plus phone calls), 878 to mail only, and 876 to usual care. Of the respondents, 174 (27%) of 643 in the usual care group, 200 (32%) of 628 in the mail only group, and 196 (37%) of 531 allocated to the full intervention completed cardiac rehabilitation (adjusted odds ratio 1.55, 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 2.03). In the mail plus phone group, 11.7%, 6.0%, 14.4%, 32.9%, and 35.0% reported adherence to 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 drug classes after one year, respectively, in comparison with 12.5%, 6.8%, 13.6%, 30.2%, and 36.8% in the mail only group, and 12.2%, 8.4%, 13.1%, 30.3%, and 36.1% in the usual care group, respectively (mail only v usual care, odds ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 1.19; full intervention v usual care, 0.99, 0.82 to 1.20). CONCLUSIONS:Scalable interventions delivered by mail plus phone can increase completion of cardiac rehabilitation after myocardial infarction but not adherence to medication. More intensive interventions should be tested to improve adherence to medication and to evaluate the association between attendance at cardiac rehabilitation and adherence to medication. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02382731, registered 9 March 2015 before any patient enrolment.
Project description:To evaluate the utility of offering physicians electronic options as alternatives to completing mail questionnaires.A survey of colorectal cancer screening practices of Alabama primary care physicians, conducted May-June 2010.In the follow-up to a mail questionnaire, physicians were offered options of completing surveys by telephone, fax, email, or online.Detailed records were kept on the timing and mode of completion of surveys.Eighty-eight percent of surveys were returned by mail, 10 percent were returned by fax, and only 2 percent were completed online; none were completed by telephone or email.Offering fax options increases response rates, but providing other electronic options does not.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To develop an innovative and effective educational intervention to inform patients about the need for osteoporosis treatment and to determine factors associated with its online uptake. METHODS:Postmenopausal women with a prior fracture and not currently using osteoporosis therapy were eligible to be included in the Activating Patients at Risk for OsteoPOroSis (APROPOS). Four nominal groups with a total of 18 racially/ethnically diverse women identified osteoporosis treatment barriers. We used the Information, Motivation, Behavior Skills conceptual model to develop a direct-to-patient intervention to mitigate potentially modifiable barriers to osteoporosis therapy. The intervention included videos tailored by participants' race/ethnicity and their survey responses: ranked barriers to osteoporosis treatment, deduced barriers to treatment, readiness to behavior change, and osteoporosis treatment history. Videos consisted of "storytelling" narratives, based on osteoporosis patient experiences and portrayed by actresses of patient-identified race/ethnicity. We also delivered personalized brief phone calls followed by an interactive voice-response phone messages aimed to promote uptake of the videos. RESULTS:To address the factors associated with online intervention uptake, we focused on participants assigned to the intervention arm (n = 1342). These participants were 92.9% Caucasian, with a mean (SD) age 74.9 (8.0) years and the majority (77.7%) had some college education. Preference for natural treatments was the barrier ranked #1 by most (n = 130; 27%), while concern about osteonecrosis of the jaw was the most frequently reported barrier (at any level; n = 322; 67%). Overall, 28.1% (n = 377) of participants in the intervention group accessed the videos online. After adjusting for relevant covariates, the participants who provided an email address had 6.07 (95% CI 4.53-8.14) higher adjusted odds of accessing their online videos compared to those who did not. CONCLUSION:We developed and implemented a novel tailored multi-modal intervention to improve initiation of osteoporosis therapy. An email address provided on the survey was the most important factor independently associated with accessing the intervention online. The design and uptake of this intervention may have implications for future studies in osteoporosis or other chronic diseases.