USE OF ELECTRONIC QUESTIONNAIRES TOPROVIDE PATIENT-CENTRIC HEALTHCARE IN OVERACTIVE BLADDER
C. J. PALMER1, B.FARHAN 1, T. HOANG 2, L. ZHANG 2, D.V. NGUYEN 3, R. DO 1, N. D. NGUYEN 1,G. GHONIEM 4;
1Urology, Univ. of CaliforniaIrvine, Orange, CA, 2Institute for Clinical andTranslational Science, Univ. of California Irvine, Irvine, CA,3Medicine, Univ. of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, 4Univ.of California, Irvine, Orange, CA.
Introduction: Overactive bladder(OAB) syndrome is defined by the International Continence Society asurinary urgency, usually accompanied by frequency and nocturia, withor without urgency urinary incontinence, in the absence of urinarytract infection (UTI) or other obvious pathology. Severity andresponse to treatment is measured using the validated questionnairesOveractive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS) and Patient Perception ofBladder Condition (PPBC). Electronic questionnaires have been used infew other specialties with the hopes of improving treatment outcomesand patient’s satisfaction. However, they have not been widelyutilized in the urological field, specifically in regards toOAB.
Objective: The primary objective of our study was toevaluate how well the electronic questionnaires are preferred bypatients over paper versions. The secondary objective was to look atpreference in relation to age, education, and familiarity with theiPad.
Methods: We performed a prospective evaluation ofLaborie’s iList® electronic questionnaire application, to patientspresenting to our institution's Urology clinic with symptoms of OAB.In total, 72 patients with OAB completed both the OABSS and PPBCquestionnaires. One group randomized to the electronic format on aniPad and the other to a paper format. We examined variablespotentially associated with the outcomes of interest, which includedpatient demographic data, questionnaire method preference, patientresponse rate, and iPad use familiarity.
Results: FromNovember 2015 to August 2016, 72 patients were enrolled in the study,with ages ranging 39-87. 53% were female, and 47% were 65 years oryounger. We used a 2 sided Z-test to determine whether the proportionof patients who considered iPad to be the same, better, or muchbetter than paper was significantly greater than 50%. A two-sidedchi-square test was used to asses whether the intervention effect wassignificantly different among the demographic subgroups. Overall,those who considered the iPad to be the same, better or much betterthan paper was 80.6% (95% CI, p < 0.0001). The percentage ofpatients who considered iPad to be the same, better, or much betterthan paper ranged from 74% to 96% regardless of age, gender, andeducation subgroups, as well as among those with any familiarity withiPad (all p < 0.004). However, among those who reported thatthey were not at all familiar with iPad (N=19), only 42% preferredthe electronic questionnaire (p = 0.4913).
Conclusions: Wefound that the proportion of patients who consider electronicquestionnaires to be equivalent or better to paper versions issignificantly higher than those who prefer paper questionnaires,regardless of age, gender, or education level. To our knowledge, thisis the first integration of electronic questionnaires in thetreatment of OAB.