Correlation of Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES), and Constant (CS) scores in idiopathic adhesive capsulitis

Kolade, Oluwadamilola; Ghosh, Niloy; Luthringer, Tyler A.; Rosenthal, Yoav; Kwon, Young W.; Rokito, Andrew S.; Zuckerman, Joseph D.

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2020.05.040

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, their use is hindered by a large number of different PROMs and their variability in effectiveness. 22,23 Previous crosssectional studies 11,12,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] have shown a strong correlation between PROMIS UE CAT and legacy instruments across a spectrum of common orthopedic conditions and procedures. However, there are fewer longitudinal correlation studies 19,21,[32][33][34][35][36] in the literature and none in patients undergoing TSA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance and responsiveness to change of PROMIS UE in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty

Pines

Gordon

Alben

et al. 2022

Journal Orthopaedic Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Patient‐Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Computer Adaptive Test (PROMIS UE CAT) is a newer patient‐reported outcome measure for upper extremity physical function. To date, no longitudinal study exists assessing PROMIS UE CAT responsiveness in patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this prospective longitudinal study is to report PROMIS UE CAT responsiveness to change and correlation to legacy instruments in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Ninety‐six patients (97 shoulders) undergoing TSA completed the PROMIS UE, Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) preoperatively and postoperatively at 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and after 6 months. Spearman's correlation coefficients (r) were calculated between PROMIS UE and other scores at each time‐point. Responsiveness to change was assessed using the effect size (Cohen's d) and standardized response mean compared with the preoperative time‐point. Floor and ceiling effects were also assessed. PROMIS UE CAT demonstrated positive responsiveness at all time‐points after TSA. It demonstrated excellent correlation (range: 0.68–0.84) with ASES, SST, and OSS at all postoperative time‐points, but the correlation was weaker (r < 0.6, except OSS) preoperatively. Only OSS and SST showed ceiling effects at the 6–12‐month time‐point (16.8% and 18.2%, respectively). PROMIS UE CAT responsiveness to change and strength of correlation with legacy instruments improves with time elapsed after TSA. Further quantification of meaningful responsiveness to change will require estimation of the minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit for PROMIS UE CAT.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance and responsiveness to change of PROMIS UE in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty

Pines

Gordon

Alben

et al. 2022

Journal Orthopaedic Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors concluded that PROMIS PF-UE CAT displayed comparable efficacy with the commonly used shoulder legacy outcome scores and with less survey burden to the patients. 22 Morgan et al 17 analyzed a cohort of 47 patients older than 60 years with displaced proximal humerus fractures after treatment. They found moderate-to-strong correlations between PROMIS PF CAT scores and three general orthopaedic questionnaires (DASH, Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment [SMFA] Bothersome Index, and SMFA Functional Index) and the CSS.…”

Section: Promis Validation and Comparisons In Specific Shoulder Condi...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors concluded that PROMIS PF-UE CAT displayed comparable efficacy with the commonly used shoulder legacy outcome scores and with less survey burden to the patients. 22…”

Section: Promis In Upper Extremity and Shoulder Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Current Utilization of Patient-reported Outcome Measurement Information System in Shoulder, Elbow, and Sports Medicine

Trofa

Desai

et al. 2022

J Am Acad Orthop Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical research using patient-reported outcome measures has been critical within the field of shoulder, elbow, and sports medicine in helping clinicians deliver evidence-based and value-based medicine. Recently, however, clinicians have advocated for improving the process of obtaining clinically meaningful information from patients while decreasing survey fatigue and increasing compliance. To that end, the National Institutes of Health created the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information System (PROMIS) in which a number of institutions and research investigations have adopted for reporting outcomes. A special focus has also been placed on PROMIS Computer Adaptive Testing forms, which tailor questioning through item response theory. The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the utilization, advantages, and disadvantages of PROMIS within the field of shoulder, elbow, and sports medicine and provide a comparison with legacy patient-reported outcome measure measurements. Clinical research based on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has allowed practitioners to critically assess treatment efficacies regarding patients' symptoms, function, and quality of life. Evaluating and understanding patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is increasingly important given today's ever-increasing focus on delivery of evidencebased medicine. In particular, these outcome measurements have been critical within the field of shoulder, elbow, and sports medicine (SESM) in the development and advancement of the treatment algorithms currently used within the field. Furthermore, PROs are critical for measuring the improvement of patient's health, which is an essential component for value-based care.Currently, there are dozens of instruments used to assess PROs in the field of SESM. Regarding the upper extremity, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) are commonly used. Regarding the lower extremity, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, and Hip Outcome Score (HOS) are commonly used. Short Form-36 (SF-36) and EuroQol 5-dimensions (EQ-5D

show abstract

“…Since the development and introduction of the Patient‐Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) by the National Institute of Health, there has been an extensive investigation to determine its validity in all fields of clinical medicine. PROMIS utilizes a combination of item response theory and computer adaptive testing (CAT) to assess a patient's condition in as few of questions as possible limiting question redundancy and administrative burden, while its adoption as a single scoring system would allow for an easier comparison of studies and the ability to directly compare research study outcomes [3, 12, 18, 29, 36, 41, 43, 47, 50]. Moreover, PROMIS Upper Extremity CAT Version 2.0 (UE) and PROMIS Pain instruments have shown strong correlations with legacy outcome measures across the many facets of shoulder pathology [3, 7, 9, 10, 12, 17, 18, 23, 29, 36, 39–41, 44, 47].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…PROMIS utilizes a combination of item response theory and computer adaptive testing (CAT) to assess a patient's condition in as few of questions as possible limiting question redundancy and administrative burden, while its adoption as a single scoring system would allow for an easier comparison of studies and the ability to directly compare research study outcomes [3, 12, 18, 29, 36, 41, 43, 47, 50]. Moreover, PROMIS Upper Extremity CAT Version 2.0 (UE) and PROMIS Pain instruments have shown strong correlations with legacy outcome measures across the many facets of shoulder pathology [3, 7, 9, 10, 12, 17, 18, 23, 29, 36, 39–41, 44, 47]. While these cross‐sectional and longitudinal studies have shown that PROMIS is valid for measuring patient outcomes, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for many of the common procedures to treat shoulder conditions are not currently known.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) of upper extremity PROMIS scores following arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs

Alben

Gordon

Gambhir

et al. 2023

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo calculate and determine what factors are associated with achieving the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and the Substantial Clinical Benefit (SCB) of Patient‐Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity Computer Adaptive Testing v2.0 (UE), Pain Interference (P‐Interference), and Pain Intensity (P‐Intensity) in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (aRCR). MethodsThe change in PROMIS scores representing the optimal cutoff for a ROC curve with an area under the curve analysis was used to calculate the anchor‐based MCID and SCB. To assess the responsiveness of each PROM, effect sizes and standardized response means (SRM) were calculated. To identify factors associated with attaining the MCID and SCB, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. ResultsA total of 323 patients with an average age of 59.9 ± 9.5 were enrolled in this study, of which, 187/323 [57.9%] were male and 136/323 [42.1%] were female. The anchor‐based MCID for PROMIS UE, P‐Interference, and P‐Intensity was: 9.0, 7.5, and 11.2, respectively. The respective SCB was 10.9, 9.3, and 12.7. Effect size and SRM were: PROMIS UE (1.4, 1.3), P‐Interference (1.8, 1.5), and P‐Intensity (2.3, 2.0). Lower preoperative P‐Intensity scores (p = 0.02), dominant arm involvement (p = 0.03), and concomitant biceps tenodesis (p = 0.03) were associated with patients achieving the SCB for PROMIS UE. ConclusionA large responsiveness for each of the PROMIS instruments due to the majority of patients reporting great improvement after aRCR and a small standard deviation across all outcome measures was shown in our study. Lower preoperative P‐Intensity scores and concomitant biceps tenodesis were associated with higher odds of achieving the SCB for PROMIS UE. The knowledge of MCID and SCB values for PROMIS instruments will allow the surgeon to determine whether the improvements in the PROMIS scores after aRCR are clinically meaningful. Level of evidenceLevel III.

show abstract

Correlation of Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES), and Constant (CS) scores in idiopathic adhesive capsulitis

Cited by 14 publications

References 33 publications

Performance and responsiveness to change of PROMIS UE in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty

Performance and responsiveness to change of PROMIS UE in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty

The Current Utilization of Patient-reported Outcome Measurement Information System in Shoulder, Elbow, and Sports Medicine

Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) of upper extremity PROMIS scores following arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About