Performance of PROMIS Global-10 compared with legacy instruments in patients with shoulder arthritis

Saad, Maarouf A.; Kassam, Hafiz F.; Suriani, Robert J.; Pan, Steven D.; Blaine, Theodore A.; Kovacevic, David

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2018.06.006

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the above study included measures of both physical and mental health , other validation studies of the PROMIS‐GH only included measures of disease‐specific physical health . These studies again largely support the construct validity of the PROMIS‐GH; however, the results are less consistent.…”

Section: Promis Global Healthmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…However, this study also reported low or nonsignificant correlations of GPH scale with two other osteoarthritis‐specific measures, namely the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) instrument ( r = 0.23; P = 0.0045) and the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index ( r = 0.11; P = 0.3743). Correlation coefficients between the GMH scale and the ASES assessment, SANE, and WOOS index were low ( r = 0.09‐0.26) .…”

Section: Promis Global Healthmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adult Measures of General Health and Health‐Related Quality of Life

Busija

Ackerman

Haas

et al. 2020

Arthritis Care & Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Promis Global Healthmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Promis Global Healthmentioning

confidence: 95%

Adult Measures of General Health and Health‐Related Quality of Life

Busija

Ackerman

Haas

et al. 2020

Arthritis Care & Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Similar to prior studies utilizing PROMIS, Spearman correlation strengths were categorized as excellent (>0.7), excellent-good (0.61 to 0.70), good (0.4 to 0.6), or poor (<0.4). 16 Scores are presented as the means ± SD unless otherwise indicated and significance was set at P < .05.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

PROMIS Pain Interference Is Superior vs Numeric Pain Rating Scale for Pain Assessment in Foot and Ankle Patients

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) is a popular method to assess pain. Recently, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has been suggested to be more accurate in measuring pain. This study aimed to compare NPRS and PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) scores in a population of foot and ankle patients to determine which method demonstrated a stronger correlation with preoperative and postoperative function, as measured by PROMIS Physical Function (PF). Methods: Prospective PROMIS PF and PI and NPRS data were obtained for 8 common elective foot and ankle surgical procedures. Data were collected preoperatively and postoperatively at a follow-up visit at least 6 months after surgery. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the relationship among NPRS (0-10) and PROMIS domains (PI, PF) pre-and postoperatively. A total of 500 patients fit our inclusion criteria. Results: PROMIS PF demonstrated a stronger correlation to PROMIS PI in both the pre-and postoperative settings (preoperative: ρ = −0.66; postoperative: ρ = −0.69) compared with the NPRS (preoperative: ρ = −0.32; postoperative: ρ = −0.33). Similar results were found when data were grouped by Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code. Conclusion: PROMIS PI was a superior tool to gauge a patient's preoperative level of pain and functional ability. This information may assist surgeons and patients in setting postoperative functional expectations and pain management.

show abstract

“… 21 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 As PROMIS measures continue to be introduced in new orthopedic disciplines, continued evaluation in specific patient populations before widespread adoption is essential. 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 Although the performance of the PROMIS PF CAT has previously been examined in meniscal surgery, 31 the comparative performance of the PF CAT relative to gold standard function PROMs has yet to be established. 31 Furthermore, the performance of PROMIS PIF and Depression has yet to be established in meniscal surgery.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of PROMIS Physical Function, Pain Interference, and Depression Computer Adaptive Tests Instruments in Patients Undergoing Meniscal Surgery

Nwachukwu

Patel

et al. 2020

Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare the performance of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF), pain interference (PIF), and depression computer adaptive tests (CAT) relative to legacy instruments in patients undergoing meniscal surgery. Methods Patients scheduled to undergo meniscal surgery completed legacy knee function PROMs (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS] subscores), Marx Activity Rating Scale (MARS), Veterans-Rand 12 (VR12), Short Form 12 (SF12), and the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) alongside PROMIS PF, PIF, and Depression preoperatively. Spearman rank correlations were calculated, and score distributions were examined for floor and ceiling effects. Results 152 patients (46.6 ± 14.9 years, 67.1% male) completed PROMs for appropriate inclusion. PROMIS PF yielded high-moderate to high correlations with the IKDC and KOOS subscales ( r = 0.61 to 0.73), demonstrating similar performance to the IKDC. PROMIS PIF demonstrated moderately high-moderate to high correlations with the IKDC, KOOS subscales, VR-12 Physical Component Score (PCS), and SF12 PCS ( r = 0.62 to 0.71), performing comparably to KOOS Pain ( r = 0.55 to 0.92). PROMIS Depression demonstrated moderate to high-moderate correlations with the mental health legacies ( r = 0.46 to 0.66). Significant ceiling effects were observed for MARS (n = 29, 18.8%), and significant floor effects were exhibited by PROMIS Depression (n = 38, 25%) and MARS (n = 27, 17.6%). Conclusion The PROMIS PF, PIF CAT, and Depression instruments exhibit comparable performance profiles relative to legacy knee PROMs. PROMIS PF and PIF demonstrated no floor and ceiling effects, whereas PROMIS Depression exhibited a significant relative floor effect. PROMIS PF and PIF may be appropriately used to establish functional baselines preoperatively. Level of Evidence IV, diagnostic case series.

show abstract

Performance of PROMIS Global-10 compared with legacy instruments in patients with shoulder arthritis

Cited by 26 publications

References 25 publications

Adult Measures of General Health and Health‐Related Quality of Life

Adult Measures of General Health and Health‐Related Quality of Life

PROMIS Pain Interference Is Superior vs Numeric Pain Rating Scale for Pain Assessment in Foot and Ankle Patients

Performance of PROMIS Physical Function, Pain Interference, and Depression Computer Adaptive Tests Instruments in Patients Undergoing Meniscal Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About