Pragmatic assessment of exercise in routine care using an MDHAQ: associations with changes in RAPID3 and other clinical variables

A Self-Report Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) for Face-To-Face or Telemedicine Encounters to Assess Clinical Severity (RAPID3) and Screen for Fibromyalgia (FAST) and Depression (DEP)

Purpose of Review

To update the clinical value of a patient self-report multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ).

Recent Findings

The MDHAQ includes 10 individual quantitative scores for physical function, pain, patient global assessment, fatigue, sleep, anxiety, depression, morning stiffness, change in status, and exercise status, and 5 indices, RAPID3 (routine assessment of patient index data) to assess clinical status in all diseases studied, FAST3 (fibromyalgia assessment screening tool) and MDHAQ-Dep (depression) to screen for fibromyalgia and/or depression, RADAI self-report of specific painful joints and joint count, and a symptom checklist for review of systems, and recognition of flares and medication adverse events. The MDHAQ also uniquely queries traditional “medical” information concerning comorbidities, falls, trauma, new symptoms, illnesses, surgeries, hospitalizations, emergencies, medication changes, and medication side effects. Three MDHAQ versions include long for new patients, short for new and return patients, and telemedicine. An electronic MDHAQ (eMDHAQ) has been developed with software that can interface with any electronic medical record (EMR) through the HL7 FHIR standard. However, EMR collaboration and implementation have proven difficult.

Summary

An MDHAQ provides a quantitative overview of patient status with far more information and documentation than an interview, involving minimal extra work for the physician.

Reliability, Feasibility, and Patient Acceptance of an Electronic Version of a Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire for Routine Rheumatology Care: Validation and Patient Preference Study

BACKGROUND

A multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) that was developed primarily for routine rheumatology care has advanced clinical research concerning disease burden, disability, and mortality in rheumatic diseases. Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), an index within the MDHAQ, is the most widely used index to assess rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical care in the United States, and it recognizes clinical status changes in all studied rheumatic diseases. MDHAQ physical function scores are far more significant in the prognosis of premature RA mortality than laboratory or imaging data. However, electronic medical records (EMRs) generally do not include patient questionnaires. An electronic MDHAQ (eMDHAQ), linked by fast healthcare interoperability resources (FIHR) to an EMR, can facilitate clinical and research advances.

OBJECTIVE

This study analyzed the reliability, feasibility, and patient acceptance of an eMDHAQ.

METHODS

Since 2006, all Rush University Medical Center rheumatology patients with all diagnoses have been asked to complete a paper MDHAQ at each routine care encounter. In April 2019, patients were invited to complete an eMDHAQ at the conclusion of the encounter. Analyses were conducted to determine the reliability of eMDHAQ versus paper MDHAQ scores, arithmetically and by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The feasibility of the eMDHAQ was analyzed based on the time for patient completion. The patient preference for the electronic or paper version was analyzed through a patient paper questionnaire.

RESULTS

The 98 study patients were a typical routine rheumatology patient group. Seven paper versus eMDHAQ scores were within 2%, differences neither clinically nor statistically significant. ICCs of 0.86-0.98 also indicated good to excellent reliability. Mean eMDHAQ completion time was a feasible 8.2 minutes. The eMDHAQ was preferred by 72% of patients; preferences were similar according to age and educational level.

CONCLUSIONS

The results on a paper MDHAQ versus eMDHAQ were similar. Most patients preferred an eMDHAQ.