Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries
- PMID: 27168175
- PMCID: PMC4937773
- DOI: 10.1080/17453674.2016.1181815
Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries
Abstract
The International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR) Steering Committee established the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) Working Group to convene, evaluate, and advise on best practices in the selection, administration, and interpretation of PROMs and to support the adoption and use of PROMs for hip and knee arthroplasty in registries worldwide. The 2 main types of PROMs include generic (general health) PROMs, which provide a measure of general health for any health state, and specific PROMs, which focus on specific symptoms, diseases, organs, body regions, or body functions. The establishment of a PROM instrument requires the fulfillment of methodological standards and rigorous testing to ensure that it is valid, reliable, responsive, and acceptable to the intended population. A survey of the 41 ISAR member registries showed that 8 registries administered a PROMs program that covered all elective hip or knee arthroplasty patients and 6 registries collected PROMs for sample populations; 1 other registry had planned but had not started collection of PROMs. The most common generic instruments used were the EuroQol 5 dimension health outcome survey (EQ-5D) and the Short Form 12 health survey (SF-12) or the similar Veterans RAND 12-item health survey (VR-12). The most common specific PROMs were the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and the University of California at Los Angeles Activity Score (UCLA).
Comment on
-
The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.Med Care. 1992 Jun;30(6):473-83. Med Care. 1992. PMID: 1593914
-
Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference.Control Clin Trials. 1989 Dec;10(4):407-15. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(89)90005-6. Control Clin Trials. 1989. PMID: 2691207 Clinical Trial.
-
A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity.Med Care. 1996 Mar;34(3):220-33. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003. Med Care. 1996. PMID: 8628042
-
Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement.J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996 Mar;78(2):185-90. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996. PMID: 8666621
-
Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement.J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998 Jan;80(1):63-9. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.80b1.7859. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998. PMID: 9460955
-
Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)--development of a self-administered outcome measure.J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998 Aug;28(2):88-96. doi: 10.2519/jospt.1998.28.2.88. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998. PMID: 9699158
-
Assessing activity in joint replacement patients.J Arthroplasty. 1998 Dec;13(8):890-5. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(98)90195-4. J Arthroplasty. 1998. PMID: 9880181
-
The SF-36 Health Survey as a generic outcome measure in clinical trials of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: tests of data quality, scaling assumptions and score reliability.Med Care. 1999 May;37(5 Suppl):MS10-22. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199905001-00002. Med Care. 1999. PMID: 10335740
-
Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life.J Clin Epidemiol. 1999 Sep;52(9):861-73. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00071-2. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999. PMID: 10529027
-
A comparison of pain rating scales by sampling from clinical trial data.Clin J Pain. 2000 Mar;16(1):22-8. doi: 10.1097/00002508-200003000-00005. Clin J Pain. 2000. PMID: 10741815 Clinical Trial.
-
Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS)--validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003 May 30;4:10. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-4-10. Epub 2003 May 30. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003. PMID: 12777182 Free PMC article.
-
Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation.Value Health. 2005 Mar-Apr;8(2):94-104. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x. Value Health. 2005. PMID: 15804318
-
Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance.Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Oct 11;4:79. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-79. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006. PMID: 17034633 Free PMC article.
-
The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores.J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007 Aug;89(8):1010-4. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B8.19424. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007. PMID: 17785736
-
Use of existing patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments and their modification: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Evaluating and Documenting Content Validity for the Use of Existing Instruments and Their Modification PRO Task Force Report.Value Health. 2009 Nov-Dec;12(8):1075-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00603.x. Epub 2009 Sep 25. Value Health. 2009. PMID: 19804437 Review.
-
Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report.Value Health. 2009 Jun;12(4):419-29. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00470.x. Epub 2008 Nov 11. Value Health. 2009. PMID: 19900250
-
Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review.J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011 Jun;41(6):1073-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.08.016. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011. PMID: 21621130
-
Patient-reported outcomes in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register: results of a nationwide prospective observational study.J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Jul;93(7):867-75. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B7.25737. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011. PMID: 21705555
-
Use of patient-reported outcomes in the context of different levels of data.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Dec 21;93 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):66-71. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.K.01021. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011. PMID: 22262427 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP).Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011 Nov;63 Suppl 11:S240-52. doi: 10.1002/acr.20543. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011. PMID: 22588748 Review. No abstract available.
-
Beyond joint implant registries: a patient-centered research consortium for comparative effectiveness in total joint replacement.JAMA. 2012 Sep 26;308(12):1217-8. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.12568. JAMA. 2012. PMID: 23011710 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
I can't get no satisfaction after my total knee replacement: rhymes and reasons.Bone Joint J. 2013 Nov;95-B(11 Suppl A):148-52. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B11.32767. Bone Joint J. 2013. PMID: 24187375 Review.
References
-
- Bellamy N, Buchanan W W, Goldsmith C H, Campbell J, Stitt L W.. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1988; 15(12): 1833–40. - PubMed
-
- Boston University School of Public Health VR-36, VR-12 and VR-6D. Boston University School of Public Health Web site. http://www.bu.edu/sph/research/research-landing-page/vr-36-vr-12-and-vr-6d/. 2015.
-
- Breivik E K, Björnsson G A, Skovlund E.. A comparison of pain rating scales by sampling from clinical trial data. Clin J Pain 2000; 16(1): 22–8. - PubMed
-
- Coons S J, Gwaltney C J, Hays R D, Lundy J J, Sloan J A, Revicki D A, Lenderking W R, Cella D, Basch E, ISPOR ePRO Task Force . Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health 2009; 12(4): 419–29. - PubMed
-
- Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D.. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996; 78(2): 185–90. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources