Subjects with osteoarthritis can easily use a handheld touch screen electronic device to report medication use: qualitative results from a usability study

References

• BrandtKDDieppePRadinEEtiopathogenesis of osteoarthritisMed Clin North Am20099312419059018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BarbourKEHelmickCGTheisKAPrevalence of doctor-diagnosed arthritis and arthritis-attributable activity limitation – United States, 2010–2012MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep20136220102012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HootmanJMHelmickCGProjections of US prevalence of arthritis and associated activity limitationsArthritis Rheum20065422622916385518
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WendelboeAMHegmannKTBiggsJJRelationships between body mass indices and surgical replacements of knee and hip jointsAm J Prev Med20032529029514580629
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KarlsonEWMandlLAAwehGNSanghaOLiangMHGrodsteinFTotal hip replacement due to osteoarthritis: the importance of age, obesity, and other modifiable risk factorsAm J Med2003114939812586227
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• YelinEMurphyLCisternasMGForemanAJPastaDJHelmickCGMedical care expenditures and earnings losses among persons with arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in 2003, and comparisons with 1997Arthritis Rheum2007561397140717469096
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MurphyLHelmickCGThe impact of osteoarthritis in the United StatesOrthop Nurs201231859122446800
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ConaghanPGDicksonJGrantRLCare and management of osteoarthritis in adults: summary of NICE guidanceBMJ200833650250318310005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BottomleyAJonesDClaassensLPatient-reported outcomes: assessment and current perspectives of the guidelines of the Food and Drug Administration and the reflection paper of the European Medicines AgencyEur J Cancer20084534735319013787
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WillkeRJBurkeLBEricksonPMeasuring treatment impact: a review of patient-reported outcomes and other efficacy endpoints in approved product labelsControl Clin Trials20042553555215588741
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• DeshpandePRRajanSSudeepthiBLAbdul NazirCPPatient-reported outcomes: a new era in clinical researchPerspect Clin Res2011213722145124
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• BijlsmaJWJBerenbaumFLafeberFPJGOsteoarthritis: an update with relevance for clinical practiceLancet20113772115212621684382
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TubachFRavaudPBaronGEvaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvementAnn Rheum Dis200564293315208174
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HawkerGAStewartLFrenchMRUnderstanding the pain experience in hip and knee osteoarthritis – an OARSI/OMERACT initiativeOsteoarthritis Cartilage20081641542218296075
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DevlinNJParkinDBrowneJPatient-reported outcome measures in the NHS: new methods for analysing and reporting EQ-5D dataHealth Econ2010905886905
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of HealthGuidance on the Routine Collection of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs)2009128 Available from: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_092647Accessed May 25, 2016
   Google Scholar
• BellamyNKirwanJBoersMRecommendations for a core set of outcome measures for future phase III clinical trials in knee, hip, and hand osteoarthritis. Consensus development at OMERACT IIIJ Rheumatol1997247998029101522
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PhamTDer HeijdeDVan LassereMOutcome variables for osteoarthritis clinical trials: the OMERACT-OARSI set of responder criteriaJ Rheumatol2003301648165412858473
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FitzgeraldGKHinmanRSZeniJOARSI clinical trials recommendations: design and conduct of clinical trials of rehabilitation interventions for osteoarthritisOsteoarthritis Cartilage20152380381425952351
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PaulsenAPedersenABOvergaardSRoosEMFeasibility of 4 patient-reported outcome measures in a registry settingActa Orthop20128332132722900909
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SepuchaKRStaceyDClayCFDecision quality instrument for treatment of hip and knee osteoarthritis: a psychometric evaluationBMC Musculoskelet Disord20111214921729315
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PatrickDLBurkeLBPowersJHPatient-reported outcomes to support medical product labeling claims: FDA perspectiveValue Health200710suppl 2S125S13717995471
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BroderickJEElectronic diaries: appraisal and current statusPharmaceut Med2008222697420037672
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• StoneAAShiffmanSSchwartzJEBroderickJEHuffordMRPatient compliance with paper and electronic diariesControl Clin Trials20032418219912689739
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• DaleOHagenKBDespite technical problems personal digital assistants outperform pen and paper when collecting patient diary dataJ Clin Epidemiol20076081717161749
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WyldeVBlomAWWhitehouseSLTaylorAHPattisonGTBannisterGCPatient-reported outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasty. Comparison of midterm resultsJ Arthroplasty20092421021618534427
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EscobarAQuintanaJMBilbaoAEffect of patient characteristics on reported outcomes after total knee replacementRheumatology (Oxford)20074611211916735451
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CoonsSJGwaltneyCJHaysRDRecommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO good research practices task force reportValue Health20091241942919900250
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CampbellNAliFFinlayAYSalekSSEquivalence of electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome measuresQual Life Res20152481949196125702266
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffiths-JonesWNortonMRFernEDWilliamsDHThe equivalence of remote electronic and paper patient reported outcome (PRO) collectionJ Arthroplasty2014292136213925123605
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TipladyBGoodmanKCummingsGPatient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritisPatient20103133143
   Google Scholar
• VirziRARefining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough?Hum Factors199234457468
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PerfettiCLandesmanLwebpage on the InternetEight Is Not Enough2001 Available from: http://www.uie.com/articles/eight_is_not_enoughAccessed July 15, 2015
   Google Scholar
• NielsenJLandauerTKA mathematical model of the finding of usability problemsProceedings of: ACM INTERCHI’93 ConferenceAmsterdamACM1993206213
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen [homepage on the Internet]Why You Only Need to Test with 5 Users2000 Available from: www.useit.com/alertbox/20000319.htmlAccessed February 22, 2009
   Google Scholar
• TurnerCWLewisJRNielsenJDetermining usability test sample sizeKarwowskiWRatonBInternational Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human Factors3Second edBoca Raton, FLCRC Press200630843088
   Google Scholar
• BellamyNPatelBDavisTElectronic data capture using the womac NRS 3.1 index (m-Womac): a pilot study of repeated independent remote data capture in OAInflammopharmacology201018310711120422296
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• LeeSJKavanaughALenertLElectronic and computer-generated patient questionnaires in standard careBest Pract Res Clin Rheumatol200721463764717678825
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SalaffiFGaspariniSCiapettiAGutierrezMGrassiWUsability of an innovative and interactive electronic system for collection of patient-reported data in axial spondyloarthritis: comparison with the traditional paper-administered formatRheumatology (Oxford)201352112062207023955646
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar