Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 4/2015

Open Access 01-08-2015 | Current Opinion

Capturing Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Data Electronically: The Past, Present, and Promise of ePRO Measurement in Clinical Trials

Authors: Stephen Joel Coons, Sonya Eremenco, J. Jason Lundy, Paul O’Donohoe, Hannah O’Gorman, William Malizia

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 4/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are an important means of evaluating the treatment benefit of new medical products. It is recognized that PRO measures should be used when assessing concepts best known by the patient or best measured from the patient’s perspective. As a result, there is growing emphasis on well defined and reliable PRO measures. In addition, advances in technology have significantly increased electronic PRO (ePRO) data collection capabilities and options in clinical trials. The movement from paper-based to ePRO data capture has enhanced the integrity and accuracy of clinical trial data and is encouraged by regulators. A primary distinction in the types of ePRO platforms is between telephone-based interactive voice response systems and screen-based systems. Handheld touchscreen-based devices have become the mainstay for remote (i.e., off-site, unsupervised) PRO data collection in clinical trials. The conventional approach is to provide study subjects with a handheld device with a device-based proprietary software program. However, an emerging alternative for clinical trials is called bring your own device (BYOD). Leveraging study subjects’ own Internet-enabled mobile devices for remote PRO data collection (via a downloadable app or a Web-based data collection portal) has become possible due to the widespread use of personal smartphones and tablets. However, there are a number of scientific and operational issues that must be addressed before BYOD can be routinely considered as a practical alternative to conventional ePRO data collection methods. Nevertheless, the future for ePRO data collection is bright and the promise of BYOD opens a new chapter in its evolution.
Literature
8.
go back to reference Shields AL, Shiffman S, Stone A. Patient compliance in an ePRO environment: methods for consistent compliance management, measurement and reporting. In: Byrom B, Tiplady B, editors. ePRO: electronic solutions for patient-reported data. Surrey: Gower; 2010. p. 127–42. Shields AL, Shiffman S, Stone A. Patient compliance in an ePRO environment: methods for consistent compliance management, measurement and reporting. In: Byrom B, Tiplady B, editors. ePRO: electronic solutions for patient-reported data. Surrey: Gower; 2010. p. 127–42.
9.
go back to reference Ganser AL, Raymond SA, Pearson JD. Data quality and power in clinical trials: a comparison of ePRO and paper in a randomized trial. In: Byrom B, Tiplady B, editors. ePRO: electronic solutions for patient-reported data. Surray: Gower; 2010. p. 49–78. Ganser AL, Raymond SA, Pearson JD. Data quality and power in clinical trials: a comparison of ePRO and paper in a randomized trial. In: Byrom B, Tiplady B, editors. ePRO: electronic solutions for patient-reported data. Surray: Gower; 2010. p. 49–78.
10.
go back to reference Dale O, Hagen KB. Despite technical problems personal digital assistants outperform pen and paper when collecting patient diary data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:8–17.PubMedCrossRef Dale O, Hagen KB. Despite technical problems personal digital assistants outperform pen and paper when collecting patient diary data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:8–17.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Greenwood MC, Hakim AJ, Carson E, Doyle DV. Touch-screen computer systems in the rheumatology clinic offer a reliable and user-friendly means of collecting quality-of-life and outcome data from patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45:66–71.CrossRef Greenwood MC, Hakim AJ, Carson E, Doyle DV. Touch-screen computer systems in the rheumatology clinic offer a reliable and user-friendly means of collecting quality-of-life and outcome data from patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45:66–71.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Velikova G, Wright EP, Smith AB, Cull A, Gould A, Forman D, et al. Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:998–1007.PubMed Velikova G, Wright EP, Smith AB, Cull A, Gould A, Forman D, et al. Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:998–1007.PubMed
14.
go back to reference Bushnell DM, Reilly MC, Galani C, Martin ML, Ricci JF, Patrick DL, McBurney CR. Validation of electronic data capture of the Irritable Bowel Syndrome—Quality of Life Measure, the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Irritable Bowel Syndrome and the EuroQol. Value Health. 2006;9:98–105.PubMedCrossRef Bushnell DM, Reilly MC, Galani C, Martin ML, Ricci JF, Patrick DL, McBurney CR. Validation of electronic data capture of the Irritable Bowel Syndrome—Quality of Life Measure, the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Irritable Bowel Syndrome and the EuroQol. Value Health. 2006;9:98–105.PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Tiplady B. Electronic patient diaries and questionnaires—ePRO now delivering on promise? Patient. 2010;3:179–83.PubMedCrossRef Tiplady B. Electronic patient diaries and questionnaires—ePRO now delivering on promise? Patient. 2010;3:179–83.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Coons SJ, Gwaltney CJ, Hays RD, Lundy JJ, Sloan JA, Revicki DA, et al. Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force Report. Value Health. 2009;12:419–29.PubMedCrossRef Coons SJ, Gwaltney CJ, Hays RD, Lundy JJ, Sloan JA, Revicki DA, et al. Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force Report. Value Health. 2009;12:419–29.PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Eremenco S, Coons SJ, Paty J, Coyne K, Bennett AV, McEntegart D, et al. PRO data collection in clinical trials using mixed modes: report of the ISPOR PRO mixed modes good research practices task force. Value Health. 2014;17:501–16.PubMedCrossRef Eremenco S, Coons SJ, Paty J, Coyne K, Bennett AV, McEntegart D, et al. PRO data collection in clinical trials using mixed modes: report of the ISPOR PRO mixed modes good research practices task force. Value Health. 2014;17:501–16.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Gwaltney CJ, Shields AL, Shiffman S. Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review. Value Health. 2008;11:322–33.PubMedCrossRef Gwaltney CJ, Shields AL, Shiffman S. Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review. Value Health. 2008;11:322–33.PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Zbrozek A, Hebert J, Gogates G, Thorell R, Dell C, Molsen E, et al. Validation of electronic systems to capture patient-reported outcome (PRO) data—recommendations for clinical trial teams: report of the ISPOR ePRO systems validation task force. Value Health. 2013;16:480–9.PubMedCrossRef Zbrozek A, Hebert J, Gogates G, Thorell R, Dell C, Molsen E, et al. Validation of electronic systems to capture patient-reported outcome (PRO) data—recommendations for clinical trial teams: report of the ISPOR ePRO systems validation task force. Value Health. 2013;16:480–9.PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Tiplady B. Diary design considerations: interface issues and patient acceptability. In: Byrom B, Tiplady B, editors. ePRO: electronic solutions for patient-reported data. Surrey: Gower; 2010. p. 164–83. Tiplady B. Diary design considerations: interface issues and patient acceptability. In: Byrom B, Tiplady B, editors. ePRO: electronic solutions for patient-reported data. Surrey: Gower; 2010. p. 164–83.
27.
go back to reference Leidy NK, Wilcox TK, Jones PW, Roberts L, Powers JH, Sethi S, et al. Standardizing measurement of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations. Reliability and validity of a patient-reported diary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;183:323–9.PubMedCrossRef Leidy NK, Wilcox TK, Jones PW, Roberts L, Powers JH, Sethi S, et al. Standardizing measurement of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations. Reliability and validity of a patient-reported diary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;183:323–9.PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Stone AA, Shiffman S, Schwartz JE, Broderick JE, Hufford MR. Patient compliance with paper and electronic dairies. Control Clin Trial. 2003;24:182–99.CrossRef Stone AA, Shiffman S, Schwartz JE, Broderick JE, Hufford MR. Patient compliance with paper and electronic dairies. Control Clin Trial. 2003;24:182–99.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Capturing Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Data Electronically: The Past, Present, and Promise of ePRO Measurement in Clinical Trials
Authors
Stephen Joel Coons
Sonya Eremenco
J. Jason Lundy
Paul O’Donohoe
Hannah O’Gorman
William Malizia
Publication date
01-08-2015
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 4/2015
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-014-0090-z

Other articles of this Issue 4/2015

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 4/2015 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.