PROMIS Paediatric Mobility tool is correlated with accelerometer-measured physical activity in children with hip diseases

Abstract

Aims The reduction in mobility due to hip diseases in children is likely to affect their physical activity (PA) levels. Physical inactivity negatively influences quality of life and health. Our aim was to objectively measure PA in children with hip disease, and correlate it with the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Mobility Score. Methods A total of 28 children (12 boys and 16 girls) with hip disease aged between 8and 17 years (mean 12 (SD 3)) were studied between December 2018 and July 2019. Children completed the PROMIS Paediatric Item Bank v. 2.0 – Mobility Short Form 8a and wore a hip accelerometer (ActiGraph) for seven consecutive days. Sedentary time (ST), light PA (LPA), moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA), and vigorous PA were calculated from the accelerometers' data. The PROMIS Mobility score was classified as normal, mild, and moderate functions, based on the PROMIS cut scores on the physical function metric. A one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to assess differences among mobility (normal; mild; moderate) and measured PA and relationships between these variables were assessed using bivariate Pearson correlations. Results Children classified as normally functioning on the PROMIS had less ST (p = 0.002), higher MVPA, (p = 0.002) and VPA (p = 0.004) compared to those classified as mild or moderate function. A moderate correlation was evident between the overall PROMIS score and daily LPA ( r = 0.462, n = 28; p = 0.013), moderate-to-vigorous PA ( r = 0.689, n = 28; p = 0.013) and vigorous PA (VPA) ( r = 0.535, n = 28; p = 0.013). No correlation was evident between the mean daily ST and overall PROMIS score (r = -0.282, n = 28; p = 0.146) Conclusion PROMIS Pediatric Mobility tool correlates well with experimentally measured levels of physical activity in children with hip disease. We provide external validity for the use of this tool as a measure of physical activity in children. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(2):405–410.

PROMIS Utilization in Pediatric Orthopaedics: A Scoping Review

“…A total of 51 studies8–10,17–64 of PROMIS in pediatric orthopaedics were identified in the current review. Study characteristics by year, author, orthopaedic population, topic, and cohort size can be found in Appendix, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/BPO/A524.…”

“…For the purposes of this review, patients were grouped by body part or subspecialty. Most studies were included within the “Hand and Upper Extremity”10,23–34 (25.5%, n=13) and “Sports”47–58 (23.5%, n=12) categories followed by “Spine”8,41–46 (13.7%, n=7), “Trauma”9,59–64 (13.7%, n=7), “General Pediatric Orthopaedics”17–22 (11.8%, n=6), “Lower Extremity”35–39 (9.8%, n=5), and “Orthopaedic Oncology”40 (2%, n=1).…”

“…There were 1961 unique citations included after the removal of 1756 duplicates. After initial screening, 183 studies were screened under full-text review leaving a final number of 51 studies8–10,17–64 included in this scoping review (Fig. 1).…”

“…The methodology of the studies included 3 categories: (1) Outcome studies [8][9][10]17,18,[23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][34][35][36][37][38][40][41][42]47,48,55,57,[59][60][61][62][63][64] in which baseline PROMIS scores were assessed in a specific disease state or to evaluate the outcome of a surgical procedure or treatment (n = 31, 60.8%), (2) PROM comparison studies 8,[19][20][21][22][23]29,31,33,39,41,[43][44][45][46]49,54,56,58 in which PROMIS was compared with a legacy PROM within a ...…”

Use of the PROMIS Mobility score in assessing function in adolescents and adults previously affected by childhood hip disease

“…Among children with Perthes' disease, PROMIS tools, including the child version of PROMIS Mobility, have demonstrated construct validity in this population, 15 with accelerometer data among children with hip disease demonstrating convergent construct validity through the use of experimental data. 16 …”