Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2017 Nov;42(11):867-874.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2017.06.012. Epub 2017 Jul 12.

Performance of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity (UE) Versus Physical Function (PF) Computer Adaptive Tests (CATs) in Upper Extremity Clinics

Casey M Beleckas  1 , Alex Padovano  1 , Jason Guattery  1 , Aaron M Chamberlain  1 , Jay D Keener  1 , Ryan P Calfee  2
Affiliations
Observational Study

Performance of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity (UE) Versus Physical Function (PF) Computer Adaptive Tests (CATs) in Upper Extremity Clinics

Casey M Beleckas et al. J Hand Surg Am. 2017 Nov.

Abstract

Purpose: To examine the performance of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity (UE) Function Computer Adaptive Test (CAT) relative to the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) CAT in patients seeking specialty care for upper extremity conditions.

Methods: This observational trial analyzed prospectively collected PROMIS UE and PF CAT scores from 5,202 adult patients with 10,344 outpatient clinic visits presenting to a tertiary orthopedic clinic. Pearson correlation coefficient was utilized to evaluate the association between initial PF and UE scores as well as the association between changes in PF and UE scores between visits. Differences in scores between populations presenting with hand conditions versus shoulder and elbow conditions were evaluated via Student t test, as were differences in scores between new and return patient visits.

Results: The PROMIS UE CAT scores were strongly correlated with PROMIS PF CAT scores. However, patients averaged 8 points lower scoring on UE CAT testing than on PF CAT scores. The UE CAT demonstrated a ceiling effect at a score of 56 that affected 7% of patients with a secondary ceiling at 50. Changes in PF and UE scores between visits were moderately correlated with a mean difference of less than 1 point. Patients presenting for hand conditions achieved better PF and UE scores than patients presenting for shoulder and elbow conditions.

Conclusions: The PROMIS UE module appears responsive to changes over time. However, the current UE CAT has a ceiling score of 56, which does not allow for improvement of scores 0.6 SD higher than the presumptive normative population mean of 50. Although a specific assessment of upper extremity function is desirable, continued refinement of the PROMIS UE CAT is required to better assess patients with higher levels of function.

Type of study/level of evidence: Diagnostic II.

Keywords: PROMIS; ceiling; hand; physical function; upper extremity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Histogram of initial PROMIS Upper Extremity scores.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Correlation between initial PROMIS Physical Function and PROMIS Upper Extremity scores.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Histogram of differences between initial PROMIS Upper Extremity and PROMIS Physical Function scores.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Mean values of PROMIS Upper Extremity and Physical Function scores according to 5 point binned categories of Physical Function. Bars = 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Change in PROMIS Physical Function scores between visits versus change in PROMIS Upper Extremity scores between visits with central best fit line and bordering 95% confidence intervals.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Beckmann JT, Hung M, Bounsanga J, Wylie JD, Granger EK, Tashjian RZ. Psychometric evaluation of the PROMIS Physical Function Computerized Adaptive Test in comparison to the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and Simple Shoulder Test in patients with rotator cuff disease. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015;24(12):1961–1967. - PubMed
    1. Chung K, Burns P, Sears E. Outcomes research in hand surgery: where have we been and where should we go? Journal of Hand Surgery. 2006;31(8):1373–1379. - PubMed
    1. Döring AC, Nota SP, Hageman MG, Ring DC. Measurement of upper extremity disability using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System. J Hand Surg Am. 2014;39(6):1160–1165. - PubMed
    1. Fries J, Krishnan E, Rose M, Lingala B, Bruce B. Improved Responsiveness and Reduced Sample Size Requirements of PROMIS Physical Function Scales with Item Response Theory. Arthritis Research and Therapy. 2011;13(5):147. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Morgan JH, Kallen MA, Okike K, Lee OC, Vrahas MS. PROMIS Physical Function Computer Adaptive Test Compared With Other Upper Extremity Outcome Measures in the Evaluation of Proximal Humerus Fractures in Patients Older Than 60 Years. J Orthop Trauma. 2015;29(6):257–263. - PubMed

Publication types