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

Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery

Volumn 24, Issue 12, 2015, Pages 1961-1967

  Beckmann, James T ^a   Hung, Man ^a   Bounsanga, Jerry ^a   Wylie, James D ^a   Granger, Erin K ^a   Tashjian, Robert Z ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score; Computerized adaptive testing; Outcome; PROMIS; Psychometrics; Rotator cuff; Simple Shoulder Test; Upper extremity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AMERICAN SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGEONS SCORE; ARTICLE; BOARD OF TRUSTEES; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTERIZED ADAPTIVE TESTING; CONVERGENT VALIDITY; EVALUATION STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT ERROR; MIDDLE AGED; NATIONAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION; PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME MEASUREMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM PHYSICAL FUNCTION COMPUTERIZED ADAPTIVE TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; ROTATOR CUFF INJURY; SAMPLE SIZE; SELF REPORT; SIMPLE SHOULDER TEST; SURGEON; AGED; CONVALESCENCE; ELBOW; INFORMATION PROCESSING; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; MEDICAL SOCIETY; MUSCLE DISEASE; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; ROTATOR CUFF; SHOULDER; UNITED STATES; VERY ELDERLY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING; ELBOW JOINT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MUSCULAR DISEASES; PSYCHOMETRICS; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROTATOR CUFF; SHOULDER; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; SURGEONS; UNITED STATES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84947489337     PISSN: 10582746     EISSN: 15326500     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.06.025     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Amtmann D., Cook K.F., Jensen M.P., Chen W.H., Choi S., Revicki D., et al. Development of a PROMIS item bank to measure pain interference. Pain 2010, 150:173-182. 10.1016/j.pain.2010.04.025.
2. Bryant D., Litchfield R., Sandow M., Gartsman G.M., Guyatt G., Kirkley A. A comparison of pain, strength, range of motion, and functional outcomes after hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87:1947-1956. 10.2106/JBJS.D.02854.
3. Cappelleri J.C., Jason Lundy J., Hays R.D. Overview of classical test theory and item response theory for the quantitative assessment of items in developing patient-reported outcomes measures. Clin Ther 2014, 36:648-662. 10.1016/j.clinthera.2014.04.006.
4. Cella D., Chang C.H. A discussion of item response theory and its applications in health status assessment. Med Care 2000, 38(Suppl):II66-II72.
5. Cook K.F., O'Malley K.J., Roddey T.S. Dynamic assessment of health outcomes: time to let the CAT out of the bag?. Health Serv Res 2005, 40(Pt 2):1694-1711. 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00446.x.
6. Davidshofer C.O., Murphy K.R. Psychological testing: principles and applications 2005, 170-173. Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 6th ed.
7. Fries J.F., Witter J., Rose M., Cella D., Khanna D., Morgan-DeWitt E. Item response theory, computerized adaptive testing, and PROMIS: assessment of physical function. J Rheumatol 2014, 41:153-158. 10.3899/jrheum.130813.
8. Gartsman G.M., Brinker M.R., Khan M., Karahan M. Self-assessment of general health status in patients with five common shoulder conditions. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1998, 7:228-237.
9. Godfrey J., Hamman R., Lowenstein S., Briggs K., Kocher M. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the simple shoulder test: psychometric properties by age and injury type. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2007, 16:260-267. 10.1016/j.jse.2006.07.003.
10. Hinkle D.E., Wiersma W., Jurs S.G. Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences 1998, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA. 4th ed.
11. Hung M., Baumhauer J.F., Brodsky J.W., Cheng C., Ellis S.J., Franklin J.D., et al. Psychometric comparison of the PROMIS physical function CAT with the FAAM and FFI for measuring patient-reported outcomes. Foot Ankle Int 2014, 35:592-599. 10.1177/1071100714528492.
12. Hung M., Clegg D.O., Greene T., Saltzman C.L. Evaluation of the PROMIS physical function item bank in orthopaedic patients. J Orthop Res 2011, 29:947-953. 10.1002/jor.21308.
13. Hung M., Hon S.D., Franklin J.D., Kendall R.W., Lawrence B.D., Neese A., et al. Psychometric properties of the PROMIS physical function item bank in patients with spinal disorders. Spine 2014, 39:158-163. 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000097.
14. Hung M., Nickisch F., Beals T.C., Greene T., Clegg D.O., Saltzman C.L. New paradigm for patient-reported outcomes assessment in foot & ankle research: computerized adaptive testing. Foot Ankle Int 2012, 33:621-626. 10.3113/FAI.2012.0621.
15. Hung M., Stuart A., Cheng C., Hon S.D., Spiker R., Lawrence B., et al. Predicting the DRAM mZDI using the PROMIS anxiety and depression. Spine 2015, 40:179-183. 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000706.
16. Hung M., Stuart A.R., Higgins T.F., Saltzman C.L., Kubiak E.N. Computerized adaptive testing using the PROMIS physical function item bank reduces test burden with less ceiling effects compared to the short musculoskeletal function assessment in orthopaedic trauma patients. J Orthop Trauma 2014, 28:439-443. 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000059.
17. Jepson C., Asch D.A., Hershey J.C., Ubel P.A. In a mailed physician survey, questionnaire length had a threshold effect on response rate. J Clin Epidemiol 2005, 58:103-105. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.06.004.
18. Kocher M.S., Horan M.P., Briggs K.K., Richardson T.R., O'Holleran J., Hawkins R.J. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons subjective shoulder scale in patients with shoulder instability, rotator cuff disease, and glenohumeral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87:2006-2011. 10.2106/JBJS.C.01624.
19. Michener L.A., McClure P.W., Sennett B.J. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section: reliability, validity, and responsiveness. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2002, 11:587-594. 10.1067/mse.2002.127096.
20. Overbeek C.L., Nota S.P., Jayakumar P., Hageman M.G., Ring D. The PROMIS physical function correlates with the QuickDASH in patients with upper extremity illness. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015, 473:311-317. 10.1007/s11999-014-3840-2.
21. Relman A.S. Assessment and accountability: the third revolution in medical care. N Engl J Med 1988, 319:1220-1222.
22. Rogers F., Horst M., To T., Rogers A., Edavettal M., Wu D., et al. Factors associated with patient satisfaction scores for physician care in trauma patients. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2013, 75:110-114. discussion 114-5. 10.1097/TA.0b013e318298484f.
23. Rose M., Bjorner J.B., Gandek B., Bruce B., Fries J.F., Ware J.E. The PROMIS Physical Function item bank was calibrated to a standardized metric and shown to improve measurement efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol 2014, 67:516-526. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.10.024.
24. Roy J.S., MacDermid J.C., Woodhouse L.J. Measuring shoulder function: a systematic review of four questionnaires. Arthritis Rheum 2009, 61:623-632. 10.1002/art.24396.
25. Slobogean G.P., Slobogean B.L. Measuring shoulder injury function: common scales and checklists. Injury 2011, 42:248-252. 10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.046.
26. Tashjian R.Z., Deloach J., Green A., Porucznik C.A., Powell A.P. Minimal clinically important differences in ASES and simple shoulder test scores after nonoperative treatment of rotator cuff disease. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010, 92:296-303. 10.2106/JBJS.H.01296.
27. Tyser A.R., Beckmann J., Franklin J.D., Cheng C., Hon S.D., Wang A., et al. Evaluation of the PROMIS physical function computer adaptive test in the upper extremity. J Hand Surg Am 2014, 39:2047-2051.e4. 10.1016/j.jhsa.2014.06.130.
28. Wylie J.D., Beckmann J.T., Granger E., Tashjian R.Z. Functional outcomes assessment in shoulder surgery. World J Orthop 2014, 5:623-633. 10.5312/wjo.v5.i5.623.