Cargando…

Using PROMIS for measuring recovery after abdominal surgery: a pilot study

BACKGROUND: To assess the construct validity and responsiveness of the PROMIS Physical Function v1.2 short form 8b (PROMIS-PF), and the PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities v2.0 short form 8a (PROMIS-APS) in postoperative recovery. METHODS: An observational pilot study was co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van der Meij, Eva, Anema, Johannes R., Huirne, Judith A. F., Terwee, Caroline B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5819257/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29458373
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-2929-9
_version_ 1783301177935396864
author van der Meij, Eva
Anema, Johannes R.
Huirne, Judith A. F.
Terwee, Caroline B.
author_facet van der Meij, Eva
Anema, Johannes R.
Huirne, Judith A. F.
Terwee, Caroline B.
author_sort van der Meij, Eva
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To assess the construct validity and responsiveness of the PROMIS Physical Function v1.2 short form 8b (PROMIS-PF), and the PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities v2.0 short form 8a (PROMIS-APS) in postoperative recovery. METHODS: An observational pilot study was conducted in which 30 patients participated, undergoing various forms of abdominal surgery. Patients completed the PROMIS-PF and PROMIS-APS, the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) and the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS) at several time points before and after surgery. The construct validity and responsiveness of the two PROMIS short forms were evaluated by testing pre-defined hypotheses and were considered adequate when at least 75% of the data was consistent with the hypotheses. Construct validity was evaluated by calculating Spearman correlations and the responsiveness by calculating effect sizes. RESULTS: 6/7 (85.7%) of the results were consistent with the hypotheses supporting the construct validity of the PROMIS-PF. For the PROMIS-APS this was the case in 7/15 (46.7%) of the results. For the PROMIS-PF, 6/7 (85.7%) of the results were consistent with the hypotheses, supporting responsiveness. Regarding the responsiveness of the PROMIS-APS, only 7 out of 13 (53.8%) of these results were consistent with the hypotheses. CONCLUSIONS: This study supported the construct validity and the responsiveness of the PROMIS-PF v1.2 short form 8b for measuring recovery in abdominal surgery. Considering the major advantages of PROMIS, we recommend the use of the PROMIS-PF in abdominal surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5819257
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58192572018-02-21 Using PROMIS for measuring recovery after abdominal surgery: a pilot study van der Meij, Eva Anema, Johannes R. Huirne, Judith A. F. Terwee, Caroline B. BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: To assess the construct validity and responsiveness of the PROMIS Physical Function v1.2 short form 8b (PROMIS-PF), and the PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities v2.0 short form 8a (PROMIS-APS) in postoperative recovery. METHODS: An observational pilot study was conducted in which 30 patients participated, undergoing various forms of abdominal surgery. Patients completed the PROMIS-PF and PROMIS-APS, the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) and the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS) at several time points before and after surgery. The construct validity and responsiveness of the two PROMIS short forms were evaluated by testing pre-defined hypotheses and were considered adequate when at least 75% of the data was consistent with the hypotheses. Construct validity was evaluated by calculating Spearman correlations and the responsiveness by calculating effect sizes. RESULTS: 6/7 (85.7%) of the results were consistent with the hypotheses supporting the construct validity of the PROMIS-PF. For the PROMIS-APS this was the case in 7/15 (46.7%) of the results. For the PROMIS-PF, 6/7 (85.7%) of the results were consistent with the hypotheses, supporting responsiveness. Regarding the responsiveness of the PROMIS-APS, only 7 out of 13 (53.8%) of these results were consistent with the hypotheses. CONCLUSIONS: This study supported the construct validity and the responsiveness of the PROMIS-PF v1.2 short form 8b for measuring recovery in abdominal surgery. Considering the major advantages of PROMIS, we recommend the use of the PROMIS-PF in abdominal surgery. BioMed Central 2018-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5819257/ /pubmed/29458373 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-2929-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
van der Meij, Eva
Anema, Johannes R.
Huirne, Judith A. F.
Terwee, Caroline B.
Using PROMIS for measuring recovery after abdominal surgery: a pilot study
title Using PROMIS for measuring recovery after abdominal surgery: a pilot study
title_full Using PROMIS for measuring recovery after abdominal surgery: a pilot study
title_fullStr Using PROMIS for measuring recovery after abdominal surgery: a pilot study
title_full_unstemmed Using PROMIS for measuring recovery after abdominal surgery: a pilot study
title_short Using PROMIS for measuring recovery after abdominal surgery: a pilot study
title_sort using promis for measuring recovery after abdominal surgery: a pilot study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5819257/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29458373
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-2929-9
work_keys_str_mv AT vandermeijeva usingpromisformeasuringrecoveryafterabdominalsurgeryapilotstudy
AT anemajohannesr usingpromisformeasuringrecoveryafterabdominalsurgeryapilotstudy
AT huirnejudithaf usingpromisformeasuringrecoveryafterabdominalsurgeryapilotstudy
AT terweecarolineb usingpromisformeasuringrecoveryafterabdominalsurgeryapilotstudy