Hip fracture in the elderly multidisciplinary rehabilitation (FEMuR) feasibility study: testing the use of routinely collected data for future health economic evaluations.



Williams, Nefyn H ORCID: 0000-0002-8078-409X, Mawdesley, Kevin, Roberts, Jessica L, Din, Nafees Ud ORCID: 0000-0001-5739-1207, Totton, Nicola, Charles, Joanna M, Hoare, Zoe and Edwards, Rhiannon T
(2018) Hip fracture in the elderly multidisciplinary rehabilitation (FEMuR) feasibility study: testing the use of routinely collected data for future health economic evaluations. Pilot and feasibility studies, 4. 76 - ?.

[img] Text
2018 FEMuR triangulation.pdf - Published Version

Download (982kB)

Abstract

Health economic evaluations rely on the accurate measurement of health service resource use in order to calculate costs. These are usually measured with patient completed questionnaires using instruments such as the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI). These rely on participants' recall and can be burdensome to complete. Health service activity data are routinely captured by electronic databases.The aim was to test methods for obtaining these data and compare with those data collected using the CSRI, within a feasibility study of an enhanced rehabilitation intervention following hip fracture (Fracture in the Elderly Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation: FEMuR).Primary care activity including prescribing data was obtained from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank and secondary care activity (Emergency Department attendances, out-patient visits and in-patient days) directly from Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board (BCUHB), North Wales, UK. These data were compared with patient responses from the CSRI using descriptive statistics and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).It was possible to compare health service resource use data for 49 out of 61 participants in the FEMuR study. For emergency department (ED) attendances, records matched in 23 (47%) cases, 21 (43%) over-reported on electronic records compared with CSRI and five participants (10%) under-reported, with an overall ICC of 0.42. For out-patient episodes, records matched in only six cases, 28 participants over-reported on electronic records compared with CSRI and 15 (12%) under-reported, with an overall ICC of only 0.27. For in-patient days, records matched exactly in only five cases (10%), but if an error margin of 7 days was allowed, then agreement rose to 39 (66%) cases, and the overall ICC for all data was 0.88.It was only possible to compare prescribing data for 12 participants. For prescribing data, the SAIL data reported 117 out of 118 items (99%) and the CSRI only 89 (79%) items.The use of routinely collected data has the potential to improve the efficiency of trials and other studies. Although the methodology to make the data available has been demonstrated, the data obtained was incomplete and the validity of using this method remains to be demonstrated.Trial registration: ISRCTN22464643 Registered 21 July 2014.

Item Type: Article
Depositing User: Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited: 08 May 2018 09:56
Last Modified: 28 Nov 2019 08:27
DOI: 10.1186/s40814-018-0269-5
URI: http://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3021055
Repository Staff Access