Cargando…

The responsiveness of the PROMIS instruments and the qDASH in an upper extremity population

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the responsiveness of several PROMIS patient-reported outcome measures in patients with hand and upper extremity disorders and provided comparisons with the qDASH instrument. METHODS: The PROMIS Upper Extremity computer adaptive test (UE CAT) v1.2, the PROMIS Physica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hung, Man, Saltzman, Charles L., Greene, Tom, Voss, Maren W., Bounsanga, Jerry, Gu, Yushan, Wang, Angela A., Hutchinson, Douglas, Tyser, Andrew R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5934915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29757302
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-017-0019-0
_version_ 1783320207897395200
author Hung, Man
Saltzman, Charles L.
Greene, Tom
Voss, Maren W.
Bounsanga, Jerry
Gu, Yushan
Wang, Angela A.
Hutchinson, Douglas
Tyser, Andrew R.
author_facet Hung, Man
Saltzman, Charles L.
Greene, Tom
Voss, Maren W.
Bounsanga, Jerry
Gu, Yushan
Wang, Angela A.
Hutchinson, Douglas
Tyser, Andrew R.
author_sort Hung, Man
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the responsiveness of several PROMIS patient-reported outcome measures in patients with hand and upper extremity disorders and provided comparisons with the qDASH instrument. METHODS: The PROMIS Upper Extremity computer adaptive test (UE CAT) v1.2, the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) CAT v1.2, the PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) CAT v1.1 and the qDASH were administered to patients presenting to an orthopaedic hand clinic during the years 2014–2016, along with anchor questions. The responsiveness of these instruments was assessed using anchor based methods. Changes in functional outcomes were evaluated by paired-sample t-test, effect size, and standardized response mean. RESULTS: There were a total of 255 patients (131 females and 124 males) with an average age of 50.75 years (SD = 15.84) included in our study. Based on the change and no change scores, there were three instances (PI at 3 months, PI >3 months, and qDASH >3 months follow-ups) where scores differed between those experiencing clinically meaningful change versus no clinically meaningful change. Effect sizes for the responsiveness of all instruments were large and ranged from 0.80–1.48. All four instruments demonstrated high responsiveness, with a standardized response mean ranging from 1.05 to 1.63. CONCLUSION: The PROMIS UE CAT, PF CAT, PI CAT, and qDASH are responsive to patient-reported functional change in the hand and upper extremity patient population.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5934915
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59349152018-05-09 The responsiveness of the PROMIS instruments and the qDASH in an upper extremity population Hung, Man Saltzman, Charles L. Greene, Tom Voss, Maren W. Bounsanga, Jerry Gu, Yushan Wang, Angela A. Hutchinson, Douglas Tyser, Andrew R. J Patient Rep Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the responsiveness of several PROMIS patient-reported outcome measures in patients with hand and upper extremity disorders and provided comparisons with the qDASH instrument. METHODS: The PROMIS Upper Extremity computer adaptive test (UE CAT) v1.2, the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) CAT v1.2, the PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) CAT v1.1 and the qDASH were administered to patients presenting to an orthopaedic hand clinic during the years 2014–2016, along with anchor questions. The responsiveness of these instruments was assessed using anchor based methods. Changes in functional outcomes were evaluated by paired-sample t-test, effect size, and standardized response mean. RESULTS: There were a total of 255 patients (131 females and 124 males) with an average age of 50.75 years (SD = 15.84) included in our study. Based on the change and no change scores, there were three instances (PI at 3 months, PI >3 months, and qDASH >3 months follow-ups) where scores differed between those experiencing clinically meaningful change versus no clinically meaningful change. Effect sizes for the responsiveness of all instruments were large and ranged from 0.80–1.48. All four instruments demonstrated high responsiveness, with a standardized response mean ranging from 1.05 to 1.63. CONCLUSION: The PROMIS UE CAT, PF CAT, PI CAT, and qDASH are responsive to patient-reported functional change in the hand and upper extremity patient population. Springer International Publishing 2017-11-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5934915/ /pubmed/29757302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-017-0019-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 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.
spellingShingle Research
Hung, Man
Saltzman, Charles L.
Greene, Tom
Voss, Maren W.
Bounsanga, Jerry
Gu, Yushan
Wang, Angela A.
Hutchinson, Douglas
Tyser, Andrew R.
The responsiveness of the PROMIS instruments and the qDASH in an upper extremity population
title The responsiveness of the PROMIS instruments and the qDASH in an upper extremity population
title_full The responsiveness of the PROMIS instruments and the qDASH in an upper extremity population
title_fullStr The responsiveness of the PROMIS instruments and the qDASH in an upper extremity population
title_full_unstemmed The responsiveness of the PROMIS instruments and the qDASH in an upper extremity population
title_short The responsiveness of the PROMIS instruments and the qDASH in an upper extremity population
title_sort responsiveness of the promis instruments and the qdash in an upper extremity population
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5934915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29757302
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-017-0019-0
work_keys_str_mv AT hungman theresponsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT saltzmancharlesl theresponsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT greenetom theresponsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT vossmarenw theresponsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT bounsangajerry theresponsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT guyushan theresponsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT wangangelaa theresponsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT hutchinsondouglas theresponsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT tyserandrewr theresponsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT hungman responsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT saltzmancharlesl responsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT greenetom responsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT vossmarenw responsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT bounsangajerry responsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT guyushan responsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT wangangelaa responsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT hutchinsondouglas responsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation
AT tyserandrewr responsivenessofthepromisinstrumentsandtheqdashinanupperextremitypopulation