scholarly journals How should we define clinically significant improvement on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) for patients undergoing Knee Meniscal Surgery?

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (7_suppl6) ◽  
pp. 2325967120S0045
Author(s):  
Yining Lu ◽  
Benedict Nwachukwu ◽  
Alexander Beletsky ◽  
Bhavik Patel ◽  
Adam Yanke ◽  
...  

Objectives: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) attempts to optimize patient reported outcome (PRO) instruments by utilizing item response theory (IRT) and computer adaptive testing (CAT). Relatively little is known about clinically significant outcome (CSO) improvements on the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) CAT. The objective of this study is to define the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) of the PROMIS PF CAT in arthroscopic meniscal surgery. Methods: The PROMIS PF CAT, Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12 physical health [PCS] and mental health [MCS]), Veterans Rand-12 Health Survey (VR-12 physical health [PH] and mental health [MH]), and the Marx Activities Ratings Scale were administered pre- and post- operatively to patients undergoing arthroscopic meniscal surgery. Six months postoperatively, patients graded their knee function based on a domain-specific anchor question. Answers to the anchor questions were dichotomized to indicate achievement of SCB and MCID. A satisfaction anchor question was used to indicate achievement of PASS. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis determined the relevant psychometric values. Cutoff analysis was performed to find preoperative PRO scores predicting CSO achievement. Results: Sixty patients (N = 27, 45% female) were included, with mean age of 45.0 ± 14.0 years and average follow up of 24.0 + 1.2 weeks. The most common indication for knee arthroscopy was partial meniscectomy (N = 53; 88.3%) followed by meniscal repair (N = 7; 11.7%). MCID on PROMIS PF was calculated to be 2.08 (AUC: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.57 - 0.94). Net score improvement equivalent to achievement of SCB was found to be 7.41 (AUC: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.55 – 0.99). PASS was found to be 45.47 (AUC: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.79-0.99). Preoperative score below 37.6 on the PROMIS PF CAT predicted achievement of MCID (AUC: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.64-0.88), while scores above 41.7 predicted achievement of PASS (AUC: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.63-0.89). Absence of pre-existing arthritis and higher baseline functional status were also found to be statistically significant predictors of achieving CSOs. Conclusion: Our study defined MCID, SCB, and PASS, for the PROMIS PF CAT. We found that a pre-operative score below 37.6 was predictive for achieving a meaningful clinical change with surgery, while a pre-operative score above 41.7 was predictive of achievement of an acceptable post-operative health state. [Table: see text][Table: see text][Table: see text][Figure: see text]

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany E. Haws ◽  
Benjamin Khechen ◽  
Mundeep S. Bawa ◽  
Dil V. Patel ◽  
Harmeet S. Bawa ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEThe Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was developed to provide a standardized measure of clinical outcomes that is valid and reliable across a variety of patient populations. PROMIS has exhibited strong correlations with many legacy patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. However, it is unclear to what extent PROMIS has been used within the spine literature. In this context, the purpose of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive overview of the PROMIS literature for spine-specific populations that can be used to inform clinicians and guide future work. Specifically, the authors aimed to 1) evaluate publication trends of PROMIS in the spine literature, 2) assess how studies have used PROMIS, and 3) determine the correlations of PROMIS domains with legacy PROs as reported for spine populations.METHODSStudies reporting PROMIS scores among spine populations were identified from PubMed/MEDLINE and a review of reference lists from obtained studies. Articles were excluded if they did not report original results, or if the study population was not evaluated or treated for spine-related complaints. Characteristics of each study and journal in which it was published were recorded. Correlation of PROMIS to legacy PROs was reported with 0.1 ≤ |r| < 0.3, 0.3 ≤ |r| < 0.5, and |r| ≥ 0.5 indicating weak, moderate, and strong correlations, respectively.RESULTSTwenty-one articles were included in this analysis. Twelve studies assessed the validity of PROMIS whereas 9 used PROMIS as an outcome measure. The first study discussing PROMIS in patients with spine disorders was published in 2012, whereas the majority were published in 2017. The most common PROMIS domain used was Pain Interference. Assessments of PROMIS validity were most frequently performed with the Neck Disability Index. PROMIS domains demonstrated moderate to strong correlations with the legacy PROs that were evaluated. Studies assessing the validity of PROMIS exhibited substantial variability in PROMIS domains and legacy PROs used for comparisons.CONCLUSIONSThere has been a recent increase in the use of PROMIS within the spine literature. However, only a minority of studies have incorporated PROMIS for its intended use as an outcomes measure. Overall, PROMIS has exhibited moderate to strong correlations with a majority of legacy PROs used in the spine literature. These results suggest that PROMIS can be effective in the assessment and tracking of PROs among spine populations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document