PTPilotJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2018

Physiotherapy Questionnaires App to Deliver Main Musculoskeletal Assessment Questionnaires: Development and Validation Study.

Nestor Cavalcante Teixeira Neto, Yuri Lopes Lima, Gabriel Peixoto Leão Almeida and 3 others

PMID 29475827

WHAT IT FOUND

For two ankle questionnaires, app scores matched paper scores closely, with no significant score differences.

Completion time varied: paper was faster for FAOS, while the app was faster for AOFAS.

Key findings

01The app version of the FAOS produced total scores that did not differ significantly from the paper version, with excellent agreement.

02The app version of the AOFAS also produced total scores that did not differ significantly from the paper version, with excellent agreement.

03Completion time was mixed: the paper FAOS was faster than the app version, while the app AOFAS was faster than the paper version.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

Only two questionnaires were validated, although the app contains 18 questionnaires. Participants were aged 19 to 36 years, and people who could not understand how to use the app were excluded, so older users and people who could not use the app were not included. The supplied text does not say whether participants had ankle problems, so it is unclear whether the results apply to patients being assessed clinically. Preference results are reported only in figures, and the study did not evaluate graphic content, layout, or participants' experience with mobile phones.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude the app is validated for all musculoskeletal questionnaires or that it improves patient care. Only two ankle questionnaires were tested, and the app was not always faster.

Read it on PubMed →