Development and Validation of the Online Patient Satisfaction Index

May 29, 2019 updated by: Allan Riis, Aalborg University Hospital

The Online Patient Satisfaction Index (OPSI): Development and Validation Among Patients With Low Back Pain

Low Back Pain (LBP) is the most common musculoskeletal disorder and a leading cause of disability worldwide. It is the most frequent reason for consulting general practice and has an impact on daily life and work capacity. A cornerstone in treating LBP is the provision of information to patients, and the internet is increasingly being used as a source of health information delivery. However, the effect of and satisfaction with online information have been questioned. The investigators aimed to develop and validate a multi-item instrument to measure an index score of satisfaction of online information for patients with LBP.

The conceptualization of a Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) to measure a multidimensional index score is modelled on the assumption of a causal relationship between domains of experiences with online information and patients' combined index score of satisfaction. Findings from 15 patient interviews was applied to draft the first version of the instrument. Followed by pilot testing on patients (n=20) and experts (n=7) before validating the instrument on patients (n=150). Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had their first onset of LBP for 14 days. Patients were included regardless of pain intensity. Patients were excluded if they did not have Internet access, were pregnant, did not speak Danish as their native language, or had signs of serious underlying disease.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

BACKGROUND Low back pain (LBP) is highly prevalent and a frequent reason for patients to consult general practice. It is a common pain condition affecting both men and women at all ages. LBP is rarely caused by only one specific factor but is eventually caused by multiple and often unknown factors. This makes it difficult to perform a precise diagnosis based on a single cause and for most patients, the LBP is diagnosed as nonspecific with or without nerve root compression.

Patient education and information is a cornerstone in the management of LBP. Providing information to patients is considered a crucial issue as it is necessary to support self-management. However, the delivery of evidence based information by a healthcare professional is time consuming and not straight forward to deliver during the available consultation time in general practice.

The internet is a widely accessible source of medical information to patients and offer a range of information provided by a variety of different sources. It has been reported that about 50% of patients use internet search for health and medical advice, and evidence suggests that patients willingness to use this source to obtain information about their health is increasing. The advance of new technologies offer new opportunities to the delivery of patient information on private computers, tablets, and smartphones. Online information can be considered an inexpensive solution to extend the combined treatment in general practice. Therefore, future optimization of information delivery has the potential to increase the delivery of evidence-based treatment of LBP which may lead to better patient outcomes. Patient satisfaction has been suggested as an important domain when evaluating the provision of online information.

Measuring patient satisfaction is a recommended outcome measure when evaluating the effect of interventions for LBP. Furthermore, patient satisfaction may be associated with compliance to the recommended treatment. Patient satisfaction is, however, rarely applied as the primary outcome in studies of LBP. To the investigators' knowledge, there exist no instrument to evaluate specific satisfaction with information delivered online for LBP. The aim of this study is to develop and validate a new questionnaire to inform about patients' satisfaction with online information for LBP.

METHODS This is a development and validation study of a patient reported questionnaire to (1) inform about the discrepancy in satisfaction of online information for LBP between groups and (2) to evaluate changes in satisfaction over time. The conceptualization is based on a formative model, which assumes a causal relationship between different domains of satisfaction with online information and the construct of patients' combined index score of satisfaction. The first version of the instrument was based on findings from an interview study among patients consulting for LBP in Danish general practice. Data for further developing on the first version were exclusively collected for piloting and validating the instrument.

HYPOTHESIS The OPSI index scores among patients categorised as promoters will be compared to the OPSI index scores of patients categorised as non-promotors on the Net Promotor Score. Based on results from the pilot test. It is hypothesised that promotors will have an OPSI score of minimum 2.5 points more than non-promotors (0-8 Points on the Net Promotor Score).

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
150

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Denmark
      • Aalborg, Denmark, 9220
        • Research Unit for General Practice in Aalborg

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Probability Sample

Study Population

Adult patients with low back pain during the last year. Patients are recruited from social media and The SANO centre, a rehabilitation center for patients with musculoskeletal pain conditions. If recruitment will be difficult we will combine with recruitment from poster in waiting rooms at primary care physicians, physiotherapists, and/or chiropractors.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

During the last year experienced LBP of any pain intensity. Regardless of present pain at inclusion.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • no internet access
  • pregnant women
  • not able to speak/read Danish
  • spinal stenosis
  • serious underlying disease for low back pain (e.g. signs of fracture, cauda equina syndrome, malignancy, osteoporosis, or spondyloarthritis)

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Observational Models: Other
  • Time Perspectives: Cross-Sectional

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Association between the Online Patient Satisfaction Index (0-24 Points, higher scores indicate higher satisfaction) and the Net Promotor Score (10-0 Points, 10-9 Points is categorised as promotors and 8-0 Points is categorised as non-promotors)
Time Frame: Cross sectional (< 45 seconds)
Convergent validity
Cross sectional (< 45 seconds)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Association between the Online Patient Satisfaction Index (0-24 Points, higher score is indicating higher satisfaction) and the Roland Morris Disability questionnaire (RMDQ, 0-23 Points, a high score is indicating high disability)
Time Frame: Cross sectional (< 45 seconds)
Discriminant validity
Cross sectional (< 45 seconds)
Test re-test of the Online Patient Satisfaction Index (0-24 Points, higher score is indicating higher satisfaction)
Time Frame: One week
Reliability (subpopulation of 50 patients)
One week
Association between the Online Patient Satisfaction Index (0-24 Points, higher scores indicate higher satisfaction) and global rating of satisfaction (10-0 Points, 10-9 Points is categorised as satisfied and 8-0 Points is categorised as not satisfied)
Time Frame: Cross sectional (< 45 seconds)
Convergent validity
Cross sectional (< 45 seconds)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Aalborg University Hospital

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Aalborg University

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Study Chair: Janus L Thomsen, PhD, Research unit for General Practice in Aalborg, Denmark

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
March 19, 2018

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
May 15, 2019

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
May 15, 2019

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
February 14, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
February 27, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
February 28, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
May 31, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
May 29, 2019

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
May 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • AllanRiis_10
  • TamanaAfzali (Other Identifier: Aalborg University)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Low Back Pain

Clinical Trials on Validation of the OPSI questionnaire

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings