Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Has a Lower Effect Size and is Less Responsive Than Legacy Hip Specific Patient Reported Outcome Measures Following Arthroscopic Hip Surgery

被引:18
作者
Nwachukwu, Benedict U. [1 ]
Rasio, Jonathan [2 ]
Beck, Edward C. [1 ]
Okoroha, Kelechi R. [3 ]
Sullivan, Spencer W. [1 ]
Makhni, Eric C. [3 ]
Nho, Shane J. [2 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Special Surg, Dept Orthopaed Surg, 610 W 58th St,3rd Floor, New York, NY 10019 USA
[2] Rush Univ, Med Ctr, Midwest Orthopaed Rush, Div Sports Med, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
[3] Henry Ford Hlth Ctr, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Detroit, MI USA
关键词
FEMOROACETABULAR IMPINGEMENT SYNDROME; PROMIS; PERFORMANCE; INSTRUMENTS; PAIN;
D O I
10.1016/j.arthro.2020.07.008
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose: To compare the use and responsiveness of Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) at 6-month follow-up. Methods: Data from patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with routine capsular closure between August 2018 and January 2019 for the treatment of FAIS were analyzed. Preoperative outcomes, 6-month postoperative outcomes, and demographics were recorded. Primary outcome measures included PROMIS Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), PROMIS Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI), and PROMIS Depression. The legacy PROMs included Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score Sport Subscale (HOS-SS), and the international hip outcome tool 12 questions (iHOT-12). Floor and ceiling effects along with the responsiveness and Cohen's d effect size of each PROM tool were calculated. Results: Ninety-six patients with an average age and body mass index of 32.4 +/- 11.9 years and 25.9 +/- 6.1 kg/m2, respectively, were included in the final analysis. All outcomes were significantly higher at 6 months compared with the preoperative level (P < .001) except for PROMIS Depression (P = .873). PROMIS-PF demonstrated excellent correlation with HOS-SS (r = 0.81; P < .001), very good correlation with HOS-ADL (r = 0.73; P < .001), and good correlation with iHOT-12 (r = 0.68; P < .001). No floor was observed for any measure. The effect size was large for all outcomes, except PROMIS Depression (d = 0.04), but largest for iHOT12 (d = 1.87) followed by HOS-ADL (d = 1.29). The iHOT-12 was more responsive than PROMIS-PI (relative efficiency [RE] = 3.95), PROMIS-PF (RE = 4.13), HOS-ADL (RE = 2.26), and HOS-SS (RE = 3.84). HOS-SS was similarly responsive to PROMIS-PI (RE=1.03) and PROMIS-PF (RE=1.08). However, PROMIS-PF was overall the least responsive. Conclusions: In patients at 6 months postoperatively from hip arthroscopy for FAIS, iHOT-12 was the most responsive and had the largest effect size. In contrast, PROMIS-PF had a lower effect size compared with legacy hip-specific PROMs. Additionally, PROMIS-PF did not correlate as well with iHOT-12 compared with HOS-SS.
引用
收藏
页码:2992 / 2997
页数:6
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   Performance of PROMIS Instruments in Patients With Shoulder Instability [J].
Anthony, Chris A. ;
Glass, Natalie A. ;
Hancock, Kyle ;
Bollier, Matt ;
Wolf, Brian R. ;
Hettrich, Carolyn M. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2017, 45 (02) :449-453
[2]   Validation of a German version of the International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT12) according to the COSMIN checklist [J].
Baumann, Florian ;
Popp, Daniel ;
Mueller, Karolina ;
Mueller, Michael ;
Schmitz, Paul ;
Nerlich, Michael ;
Fickert, Stefan .
HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2016, 14
[3]   PROMIS for Orthopaedic Outcomes Measurement [J].
Brodke, Dane Jensen ;
Saltzman, Charles L. ;
Brodke, Darrel Scott .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS, 2016, 24 (11) :744-749
[4]   Hip Arthroscopy in the presence of dysplasia [J].
Byrd, JWT ;
Jones, KS .
ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2003, 19 (10) :1055-1060
[5]   The future of outcomes measurement: item banking, tailored short-forms, and computerized adaptive assessment [J].
Cella, David ;
Gershon, Richard ;
Lai, Jin-Shei ;
Choi, Seung .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2007, 16 (Suppl 1) :133-141
[6]   Estimating minimally important differences for the PROMIS pain interference scales: results from 3 randomized clinical trials [J].
Chen, Chen X. ;
Kroenke, Kurt ;
Stump, Timothy E. ;
Kean, Jacob ;
Carpenter, Janet S. ;
Krebs, Erin E. ;
Bair, Matthew J. ;
Damush, Teresa M. ;
Monahan, Patrick O. .
PAIN, 2018, 159 (04) :775-782
[7]   PROMIS depression measures perform similarly to legacy measures relative to a structured diagnostic interview for depression in cancer patients [J].
Clover, Kerrie ;
Lambert, Sylvie D. ;
Oldmeadow, Christopher ;
Britton, Benjamin ;
King, Madeleine T. ;
Mitchell, Alex J. ;
Carter, Gregory .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2018, 27 (05) :1357-1367
[8]  
Cohen J., 1988, STAT POWER ANAL BEHA, DOI 10.4324/9780203771587
[9]   Use of PROMIS for Patients Undergoing Primary Total Shoulder Arthroplasty [J].
Dowdle, S. Blake ;
Glass, Natalie ;
Anthony, Chris A. ;
Hettrich, Carolyn M. .
ORTHOPAEDIC JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2017, 5 (09)
[10]   Why a Global PROMIS® Can't Be Kept [J].
Dowie, Jack ;
Kaltoft, Mette Kjer .
HEALTH INFORMATICS VISION: FROM DATA VIA INFORMATION TO KNOWLEDGE, 2019, 262 :114-117