Pos1507-HPR Completeness of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Over the Longitudinal Course of Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Data collection using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is affected by incomplete data, also in the field of multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Patient burden and length of data sets are important factors related to the quality of data collected for the purpose of research or clinical practice. Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyse response patterns and data completeness of a brief and a long set of PROMs used in rehabilitation. Methods: In a multicentre randomized controlled trial (RehabNytte), patients were randomized to complete either a brief or a long set of PROMs at five timepoints during the first year after admission to specialized rehabilitation. We measured completeness as the extent to which applicable PROM data were present, and response patterns in terms of dropout rates and intermittently missing assessment events. The data sets included the EQ-5D-5L, the Patient-Specific Functional Scale, the 29-item version of the PROMIS Profile instruments, and other generic PROMs commonly used in rehabilitation settings. Results: Of 2904 included patients admitted to one of 16 rehabilitation institutions, 1455 and 1449 were assigned to complete the brief or the long data set, respectively. We found a significantly higher degree of complete response among patients responding to the brief set of PROMs. Dropout rates were highest for patients receiving the long set. Regardless of length of data set, only one third of patients responded on all five timepoints. Lowest response degree occurred at discharge, where patients did not receive any automatically generated reminder from the digitally data collection system. Conclusion: For the optimal usage of PROMs to inform research, healthcare policy, and clinical practice, all stakeholders should carefully consider necessary content and length of data sets. Administrative and educational efforts to optimize data collection routines and promote patients' opportunities and motivations for repeated measurements are needed to achieve the highest possible completion rates. REFERENCES: NIL. Acknowledgements: We thank participating patients and the RehabNytte Consortium: Avonova Ringerike Rehabilitation; CatoSenteret Rehabilitation Centre; Evjeklinikken Rehabilitation Centre; Helsepartner Rehabilitation Centre; Hernes Occupational Rehabilitation Centre; HLF Briskeby Rehabilitation Centre; Montebello Rehabilitation Centre; Muritunet Rehabilitation Centre; NKS Helsehus Rehabilitation Centre; Ravneberghaugen Rehabilitation Centre; Røde Kors Haugland Rehabilitation Centre; Røysumtunet Rehabilitation Centre; Selli Rehabilitation Centre; Skogli Health- and Rehabilitation Centre; Sørlandet Rehabilitation Centre; Vikersund Rehabilitation Centre; Åstveit Rehabilitation Centre; Norwegian National Centre for Occupational Rehabilitation (NKARR); Regional Centre for Knowledge Translation in Rehabilitation (RKR); Virke Rehab; the Norwegian Federation of Organisations of Disabled People (FFO); Health Services Research and Innovation Unit at Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Center for Treatment of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases (REMEDY). Disclosure of Interests: None declared.