Patient-Reported Outcomes for Fractures of the Acetabulum: A Comparison Between Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System and Traditional Instruments

被引:8
|
作者
Schumaier, Adam P. [1 ]
Matar, Robert N. [1 ]
Ramalingam, Wendy G. [1 ]
Archdeacon, Michael T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Cincinnati, Dept Orthopaed & Sports Med, Cincinnati, OH 45221 USA
关键词
MUSCULOSKELETAL FUNCTION ASSESSMENT; COMPUTER ADAPTIVE TEST; PROMIS; QUESTIONNAIRE; ORTHOPEDICS; PERFORMANCE; SHOULDER; SF-36;
D O I
10.5435/JAAOS-D-20-01324
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
Introduction: The objective of this study was to compare instruments from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System (PROMIS) with previously validated acetabulum fracture outcome instruments. Methods: This study included adult patients presenting for routine follow-up at least 3 months after surgical treatment of an acetabulum fracture. Participants completed four different patient-reported outcomes in a randomized order: PROMIS Mobility, PROMIS Physical Function, Short Form 36 (SF-36), and Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA). Primary outcomes were the correlations between instruments, floor/ceiling effects, and survey completion time. The effects of age, education, and race on survey completion time were also evaluated. Results: Overall strong correlations were observed between PROMIS instruments and the SMFA/SF-36 (r = 0.73 to 0.86, P < 0.05) with weaker, more moderate correlations in those with >18 months of follow-up (r = 0.41 to 0.76, P < 0.05). No instruments demonstrated notable floor or ceiling effects. The PROMIS outcomes required less time to complete (PROMIS [56 to 59 seconds] than SF-36 [5 minutes 22 seconds] and SMFA [6 minutes 35 seconds]; P < 0.001). Older individuals required more time to complete the PROMIS PF (0.5 s/yr, P = 0.03), SF-36 (2.35 s/yr, P = 0.01), and SMFA (3.85 s/yr, P < 0.01). Level of education did not affect completion time; however, African Americans took significantly longer than Caucasians to complete the SMFA and SF-36 by 151 and 164 seconds (P < 0.01). Conclusion: This study supports that the PROMIS Mobility and Physical Function surveys are much more efficient instruments for evaluating patients with acetabulum fractures when compared with the SMFA and SF-36. Convergent validity of the PROMIS instruments was overall strong but weaker and more moderate in those with a long-term follow-up, and additional study is suggested for longer-term outcomes. Level of education did not influence survey completion time; however, it took markedly longer time for older individuals and African Americans to complete the SMFA and SF-36.
引用
收藏
页码:71 / 78
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Comparison of patient-reported outcomes between hip resurfacing and total hip replacement
    Lingard, E. A.
    Muthumayandi, K.
    Holland, J. P.
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 2009, 91B (12): : 1550 - 1554
  • [32] Patient-reported outcomes in borderline personality disorder
    Hasler, Gregor
    Hopwood, Christopher J.
    Jacob, Gitta A.
    Brandle, Laura S.
    Schulte-Vels, Thomas
    DIALOGUES IN CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2014, 16 (02) : 255 - 266
  • [33] Glioma patient-reported outcomes: patients and clinicians
    Peeters, Marthe
    Ottenheijm, Germaine
    Bienfait, Paul
    Eekers, Danielle
    Gijtenbeek, Anja
    Hanse, Monique
    Koekkoek, Johan
    van Leeuwen, Leonie
    Tijssen, Cees
    Dirven, Linda
    Taphoorn, Martin
    BMJ SUPPORTIVE & PALLIATIVE CARE, 2023, 13 (E1) : E205 - E212
  • [34] Predictors of Patient-Reported Function and Pain Outcomes in Operative Ankle Fractures
    Dean, Daniel M.
    Ho, Bryant S.
    Lin, Albert
    Fuchs, Daniel
    Ochenjele, George
    Merk, Bradley
    Kadakia, Anish R.
    FOOT & ANKLE INTERNATIONAL, 2017, 38 (05) : 496 - 501
  • [35] A Patient Reported Outcome Ontology: Conceptual Issues and Challenges Addressed by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®)
    Cella, David
    Hays, Ron
    PATIENT-RELATED OUTCOME MEASURES, 2022, 13 : 189 - 197
  • [36] Patient-Reported Outcomes in Elective Cranial Neurosurgery
    Reponen, Elina
    Tuominen, Hanna
    Hernesniemi, Juha
    Korja, Miikka
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2015, 84 (06) : 1845 - 1851
  • [37] Patient-Reported Outcomes - Are They Living Up to Their Potential?
    Baumhauer, Judith F.
    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2017, 377 (01): : 6 - 9
  • [38] A Guide to Interpreting a Study of Patient-Reported Outcomes
    Sears, Erika Davis
    Chung, Kevin C.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2012, 129 (05) : 1200 - 1207
  • [39] Patient-Reported Outcomes in Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Achalasia
    Alain Schoepfer
    Alex Straumann
    Ekaterina Safroneeva
    Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology, 2016, 14 (1) : 51 - 60
  • [40] Patient-reported outcomes in asthma clinical trials
    Braido, Fulvio
    Baiardini, Ilaria
    Canonica, Giorgio W.
    CURRENT OPINION IN PULMONARY MEDICINE, 2018, 24 (01) : 70 - 77