Background: Collecting data using paediatric health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments is complex, and there is a paucity of evidence regarding the comparative performance of paediatric HRQoL instruments. The Australian Paediatric Multi-Instrument Comparison (P-MIC) study was conducted to address this paucity of evidence. This study aims to understand the (1) feasibility of collecting data using paediatric HRQoL instruments in a research setting and (2) acceptability and feasibility for children and their caregivers to complete common paediatric HRQoL instruments using data from the Australian P-MIC study.
Methods: Data were from children aged 5-18 years from the Australian P-MIC study. Demographics, cost and time for data collection, dropout rates, and inconsistent responses were used to assess Aim 1. Participant-reported difficulty and completion time were used to assess Aim 2. Subgroup analyses included child age, report type (self/proxy), sample recruitment pathway (hospital/online), and online panel sample type (general population/condition groups).
Results: Overall, 5945 P-MIC participants aged 5-18 years completed an initial survey, of these, 2346 also completed the follow-up survey (39.5% response rate). Compared with online panel recruitment, hospital recruitment was more costly and time-consuming and had higher follow-up completion (33.5% versus 80.4%) (Aim 1). Data were of similar good quality (based on inconsistent responses) for both recruitment pathways (Aim 1). Participants completed each instrument in <3 min, on average, and >70% reported each instrument as easy to complete (Aim 2).
Conclusions: The Australian P-MIC study was able to collect good-quality data using both online panel and hospital recruitment pathways. All instruments were acceptable and feasible to children and their caregivers.
Keywords: acceptability; cost–benefit analysis; feasibility; paediatric; patient reported outcome measures; quality; quality of life.