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
. 2019 May;54(5):550-555.
doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-350-17. Epub 2019 May 14.

The Relationship Among 3 Generic Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Patients With Lower Extremity Health Conditions

Johanna M Hoch  1 , Christina Lorete  2 , Jamie Legner  3 , Matthew C Hoch  1
Affiliations

The Relationship Among 3 Generic Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments in Patients With Lower Extremity Health Conditions

Johanna M Hoch et al. J Athl Train. 2019 May.

Abstract

Context: Generic patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments are designed to capture health-related quality-of-life outcomes and to determine treatment effectiveness from the patient's perspective. Multiple generic PROs are used in clinical practice, and an investigation of the psychometric properties of these instruments in a high-functioning, physically active population is important for the future use of these instruments.

Objective: To determine the relationship among 3 generic PROs: the modified Disablement in the Physically Active (mDPA) Scale, the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), and the Short Form 12 (SF-12) in physically active patients seeking treatment for a lower extremity health condition.

Design: Cross-sectional study.

Setting: Athletic training clinical facility, physical therapy clinic.

Patients or other participants: One hundred patients seeking rehabilitation services for a lower extremity health condition.

Main outcome measure(s): All patients completed a demographic questionnaire and the 3 generic PROs at 1 time point during their rehabilitation: the mDPA-Total, mDPA-physical summary component (mDPA-PSC), mDPA-mental summary component (mDPA-MSC), the PROMIS-PF, and SF-12 mental component summary (SF-MCS) and physical component summary (SF-PCS). Separate Spearman rank (r) correlations were performed to assess the strength of the relationship among PRO instruments. The floor and ceiling effects were also examined.

Results: A strong relationship was present between the SF-12 PCS and the mDPA-Total (r = -0.65), the mDPA-PSC (r = -0.64), and the PROMIS-PF (r = 0.65). Significant moderate relationships were identified between the mDPA-MSC and the SF-12 PCS (r = -0.43) and MCS (r = -0.53). Weak relationships were noted between the mDPA-Total and SF-12 MCS (r = -0.21) and the SF-12 MCS and mDPA-PSC (r = -0.10) and PROMIS-PF (r = 0.20).

Conclusions: The PROMIS-PF and mDPA had good convergent and divergent validity. Clinicians treating physically active patients should consider these instruments for use in clinical practice. Future researchers should examine additional psychometric properties of these instruments in physically active patients.

Keywords: health-related quality of life; musculoskeletal injury; physical activity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Parsons JT, Snyder AR. Health-related quality of life as a primary clinical outcome in sport rehabilitation. J Sport Rehabil. 2011;20(1):17–36. - PubMed
    1. Steves R, Hootman JM. Evidence-based medicine: what it is and how does it apply to athletic training. J Athl Train. 2004;39(1):83–87. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Denegar CR. Advancing patient care: everyone wins. J Athl Train. 2008;43(4):341. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Michener LA. Patient- and clinician-rated outcome measures for clinical decision making in rehabilitation. J Sport Rehabil. 2011;20(1):37–45. - PubMed
    1. Valovich McLeod TC, Snyder AR, Parsons JT, Curtis Bay R, Michener LA, Sauers EL. Using disablement models and clinical outcomes assessment to enable evidence-based athletic training practice, part II: clinical outcomes assessment. J Athl Train. 2008;43(4):437–445. - PMC - PubMed