IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i24p9186-d459110.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors Associated with Survey Non-Response in a Cross-Sectional Survey of Persons with an Axial Spondyloarthritis or Osteoarthritis Claims Diagnosis

Author

Listed:
  • Johanna Callhoff

    (Epidemiology, German Rheumatism Research Centre, 10117 Berlin, Germany)

  • Hannes Jacobs

    (Department of Health Services Research, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany)

  • Katinka Albrecht

    (Epidemiology, German Rheumatism Research Centre, 10117 Berlin, Germany)

  • Joachim Saam

    (Department Medicine and Health Services Research, BARMER Institute for Health System Research, BARMER, 73525 Schwäbisch-Gmünd, Germany)

  • Angela Zink

    (Epidemiology, German Rheumatism Research Centre, 10117 Berlin, Germany
    Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Charité University Medicine Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany)

  • Falk Hoffmann

    (Department of Health Services Research, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany)

Abstract

Non-response in surveys can lead to bias, which is often difficult to investigate. The aim of this analysis was to compare factors available from claims data associated with survey non-response and to compare them among two samples. A stratified sample of 4471 persons with a diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and a sample of 8995 persons with an osteoarthritis (OA) diagnosis from a German statutory health insurance were randomly selected and sent a postal survey. The association of age, sex, medical prescriptions, specialist physician contact, influenza vaccination, hospitalization, and Elixhauser comorbidity index with the survey response was assessed. Multiple logistic regression models were used with response as the outcome. A total of 47% of the axSpA sample and 40% of the OA sample responded to the survey. In both samples, the response was highest in the 70–79-year-olds. Women in all age groups responded more often, except for the 70–79-year-olds. Rheumatologist/orthopedist contact, physical therapy prescription, and influenza vaccination were more frequent among responders. In the logistic regression models, rheumatologist/orthopedist treatment, influenza vaccination, and physical therapy were associated with a higher odds ratio for response in both samples. The prescription of biologic drugs was associated with higher response in axSpA. A high Elixhauser comorbidity index and opioid use were not relevantly associated with response. Being reimbursed for long-term care was associated with lower response—this was only significant in the OA sample. The number of quarters with a diagnosis in the survey year was associated with higher response. Similar factors were associated with non-response in the two samples. The results can help other investigators to plan sample sizes of their surveys in similar settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Johanna Callhoff & Hannes Jacobs & Katinka Albrecht & Joachim Saam & Angela Zink & Falk Hoffmann, 2020. "Factors Associated with Survey Non-Response in a Cross-Sectional Survey of Persons with an Axial Spondyloarthritis or Osteoarthritis Claims Diagnosis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:24:p:9186-:d:459110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/24/9186/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/24/9186/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kreis, Kristine & Neubauer, Sarah & Klora, Mike & Lange, Ansgar & Zeidler, Jan, 2016. "Status and perspectives of claims data analyses in Germany—A systematic review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 213-226.
    2. Urmila Chandran & Jenna Reps & Paul E Stang & Patrick B Ryan, 2019. "Inferring disease severity in rheumatoid arthritis using predictive modeling in administrative claims databases," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Sarah Neubauer & Kristine Kreis & Mike Klora & Jan Zeidler, 2017. "Access, use, and challenges of claims data analyses in Germany," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(5), pages 533-536, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Isabell Schellartz & Sunita Mettang & Arim Shukri & Nadine Scholten & Holger Pfaff & Thomas Mettang, 2021. "Early Referral to Nephrological Care and the Uptake of Peritoneal Dialysis. An Analysis of German Claims Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-10, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Boris A. Brühmann & Klaus Kaier & Rieka Warth & Erik Farin-Glattacker, 2023. "Cost–benefit analysis of the CoCare intervention to improve medical care in long-term care nursing homes: an analysis based on claims data," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(8), pages 1343-1355, November.
    2. Udo Schneider & Andreas Schmid & Roland Linder & Dirk Horenkamp-Sonntag & Frank Verheyen, 2018. "The Choice of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implementation (TAVI): Do Patient Co-morbidity and Hospital Ownership Type Matter?," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 735-744, October.
    3. Fränce Hardtstock & Zeki Kocaata & Thomas Wilke & Axel Dittmar & Marco Ghiani & Vasily Belozeroff & David J. Harrison & Ulf Maywald & Hans Tesch, 2021. "Healthcare resource utilization and associated cost of patients with bone metastases from solid tumors who are naïve to bone-targeting agents: a comparative analysis of patients with and without skele," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(2), pages 243-254, March.
    4. Sarah Neubauer & Kristine Kreis & Mike Klora & Jan Zeidler, 2017. "Access, use, and challenges of claims data analyses in Germany," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(5), pages 533-536, June.
    5. Stefanie March, 2017. "Individual Data Linkage of Survey Data with Claims Data in Germany—An Overview Based on a Cohort Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-16, December.
    6. Katharina Kähm & Michael Laxy & Udo Schneider & Rolf Holle, 2019. "Exploring Different Strategies of Assessing the Economic Impact of Multiple Diabetes-Associated Complications and Their Interactions: A Large Claims-Based Study in Germany," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 63-74, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:24:p:9186-:d:459110. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.