Correlation of PROMIS Physical Function and Pain CAT Instruments with Oswestry Disability Index and Neck Disability Index in Spine Patients

Papuga, M. Owen; Mesfin, Addisu; Molinari, Robert W.; Rubery, Paul T.

doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2015.07.070

Cited by 29 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the early 2000's, National Institutes of Health (NIH) has invested heavily to develop robust outcome measures, Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to be applied across different medical conditions (http://www.healthmeasures.net/ explore-measurement-systems/promis). The purpose of PROMIS is to provide clinicians and researchers with efficient, valid and reliable assessments of a patient's health status derived from patient responses to a set of rigorously developed questions about different quality of life measures (physical, mental and social) [13][14][15]. PROMIS questions may be administered with computer adaptive testing (CAT), developed based on item response theory (IRT), where questions are dynamically administered based on a subject's prior responses, thus maintaining precision while using the minimum number of questions [13,16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system and legacy instruments in multiple domains among older veterans with chronic back pain

Nayfe

Chansard²,

Hynan³

et al. 2020

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Chronic low back pain (cLBP) results in significant physical, psycho-social and socioeconomic burden. Identifying efficient and reliable patient reported outcome measures is critical for research and clinical purposes. The NIH’s Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instruments have not been compared to validated “legacy” instruments in older adults with cLBP. This study evaluates construct (convergent and discriminant) validity and time to complete (TTC) PROMIS as compared to legacy instruments. Methods We enrolled older Veterans (age 60+) with cLBP with/without leg pain scheduled for lumbar epidural steroid injections. Subjects completed PROMIS computer adaptive test item banks and corresponding legacy instruments in the following domains: pain intensity, interference, and behavior; functional status; depression and anxiety; fatigue; sleep and social functioning. Convergent and discriminant validity between PROMIS and legacy instruments was evaluated using Spearman rank order correlations; Mann-Whitney U tests compared TTC. Results Of the 71 Veterans recruited, the median (IQR) age was 67 (63–71) years old, 94% were men, 76% were White, 17% Black, and 96% were Non-Hispanic. Spearman correlations between PROMIS and legacy instruments showed moderate to very strong convergent validity in all domains (r = 0.4–1.0), except for social functioning and pain behavior (PROMIS Pain Behavior with Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire). The total median TTC for all PROMIS items was significantly shorter than legacy items, 8 min 50 s vs 29 min 14 s respectively, p < 0.001. Conclusions Given time efficiency of using PROMIS, along with strong construct validity, PROMIS instruments are a practical choice for measuring multidimensional PROs in older Veterans with cLBP for both research and clinical purposes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system and legacy instruments in multiple domains among older veterans with chronic back pain

Nayfe

Chansard²,

Hynan³

et al. 2020

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous researchers 28 identified a strong relationship between the PROMIS-PF and SF-36 PF (r ¼ 0.91) in a large number of participants who were healthy or unhealthy and pursued various levels of physical activity. In addition, numerous authors 21,[29][30][31][32] have investigated the relationship between the PROMIS-PF and other PROs commonly used when treating patients with orthopaedic conditions. For example, strong to moderate correlations were present for the QuickDASH, 17 International Knee Document Committee form, 21 and Oswestry Disability Index.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, strong to moderate correlations were present for the QuickDASH, 17 International Knee Document Committee form, 21 and Oswestry Disability Index. 30 However, the physical activity levels of the patients included in these studies were often not provided or were unclear. In addition to demonstrating good convergent and divergent validity and finding that only 11% of patients exceeded a score of 50, other researchers 20,21,29,30 determined the PROMIS-PF took less time to administer than the other instruments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…30 However, the physical activity levels of the patients included in these studies were often not provided or were unclear. In addition to demonstrating good convergent and divergent validity and finding that only 11% of patients exceeded a score of 50, other researchers 20,21,29,30 determined the PROMIS-PF took less time to administer than the other instruments. Although we did not monitor the time to completion for the instruments used in this study, the average number of questions answered by the 100 participants was 4.36 (range ¼ 4-12) on the PROMIS-PF, compared with the 16 items on the mDPA subscales and the 12 items on the SF-12 subscales.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Relationship Among 3 Generic Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Patients With Lower Extremity Health Conditions

Hoch

Lorete

Legner

2019

Journal of Athletic Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Generic patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments are designed to capture health-related quality-of-life outcomes and to determine treatment effectiveness from the patient's perspective. Multiple generic PROs are used in clinical practice, and an investigation of the psychometric properties of these instruments in a high-functioning, physically active population is important for the future use of these instruments. Objective To determine the relationship among 3 generic PROs: the modified Disablement in the Physically Active (mDPA) Scale, the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), and the Short Form 12 (SF-12) in physically active patients seeking treatment for a lower extremity health condition. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Athletic training clinical facility, physical therapy clinic. Patients or Other Participants One hundred patients seeking rehabilitation services for a lower extremity health condition. Main Outcome Measure(s) All patients completed a demographic questionnaire and the 3 generic PROs at 1 time point during their rehabilitation: the mDPA-Total, mDPA-physical summary component (mDPA-PSC), mDPA-mental summary component (mDPA-MSC), the PROMIS-PF, and SF-12 mental component summary (SF-MCS) and physical component summary (SF-PCS). Separate Spearman rank (r) correlations were performed to assess the strength of the relationship among PRO instruments. The floor and ceiling effects were also examined. Results A strong relationship was present between the SF-12 PCS and the mDPA-Total (r = −0.65), the mDPA-PSC (r = −0.64), and the PROMIS-PF (r = 0.65). Significant moderate relationships were identified between the mDPA-MSC and the SF-12 PCS (r = −0.43) and MCS (r = −0.53). Weak relationships were noted between the mDPA-Total and SF-12 MCS (r = −0.21) and the SF-12 MCS and mDPA-PSC (r = −0.10) and PROMIS-PF (r = 0.20). Conclusions The PROMIS-PF and mDPA had good convergent and divergent validity. Clinicians treating physically active patients should consider these instruments for use in clinical practice. Future researchers should examine additional psychometric properties of these instruments in physically active patients.

show abstract

“…Such questions ask patients about their perceived ability to move, their relative strength, and their coordination when making movements. [6][7][8] There is limited research on the association of preoperative PROMIS PF scores with postoperative improvement in patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF). 2 To evaluate outcomes in patients undergoing spine surgery, PROs such as the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analogue scale (VAS), and 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12) are often utilized.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of Preoperative PROMIS Scores With Short-term Postoperative Improvements in Physical Function After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the associations between preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) score, measured by PROMIS-PF and the change between pre-and postoperative PROMIS-PF scores. Methods: A prospectively maintained surgical registry was retrospectively reviewed for spine surgeries between May 2015-June 2019. Inclusion criteria were primary, single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions. Revisions, multilevel procedures, and patients missing preoperative surveys were excluded. Patients were grouped by preoperative PROMIS-PF scores of ≥ 35 and < 35, with higher scores indicating greater PF. A chi-squared and Student t-test were used to analyze categorical and continuous variables respectively. Linear regression evaluated the relationship of PROMIS-PF score improvement. Results: Of the 180 subjects, 84 were in the PROMIS-PF < 35 group which had more obese patients (p < 0.001) and more males (p = 0.001). Length of stay was greater for the PROM-IS-PF < 35 group (36.2 hours vs. 28.7 hours, p = 0.014). PROMIS-PF and Oswestry Disability Index scores were significantly different between subgroups at all timepoints. PRO-MIS-PF < 35 cohort had larger postoperative PROMIS-PF improvements at 6 weeks (p = 0.008) and 12 weeks (p = 0.003). Linear regression demonstrated a negative association between preoperative PROMIS-PF scores and improvement at 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 2 years (p < 0.001). PROMIS-PF < 35 demonstrated significantly lower rate of achieving minimum clinically important difference at 6 months, otherwise no difference observed throughout the 2-year follow-up. Conclusion: Up to 6 months postoperatively, lower preoperative PROMIS-PF scores were associated with larger PROMIS-PF improvements. Understanding the relationship preoperative PROMIS-PF scores have with postoperative improvement may enable better patient counseling.

show abstract

Correlation of PROMIS Physical Function and Pain CAT Instruments with Oswestry Disability Index and Neck Disability Index in Spine Patients

Cited by 29 publications

References 19 publications

Comparison of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system and legacy instruments in multiple domains among older veterans with chronic back pain

Comparison of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system and legacy instruments in multiple domains among older veterans with chronic back pain

The Relationship Among 3 Generic Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Patients With Lower Extremity Health Conditions

Association of Preoperative PROMIS Scores With Short-term Postoperative Improvements in Physical Function After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About