Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Research Articles

The Impact on Families of Children With Congenital Upper Extremity Differences

To investigate the impact on caregivers of caring for a child with congenital upper extremity differences. In this cross-sectional study, caregivers of patients enrolled in the multi-institutional Congenital Upper Limb Difference (CoULD) registry were contacted. Demographic information and the Impact on Family Scale (IOFS), a validated measure of perceived caregiver strain, were collected. Patient-reported outcome measures from the CoULD registry, the Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) were also analyzed for correlation with IOFS. Two hundred ninety-nine caregivers participated. Factors with significantly stronger impact on family included public insurance; bilateral upper extremity involvement; household income of $20,000-40,000; additional musculoskeletal diagnosis; and a single adult caregiver household. There was a significantly increased subcategory of IOFS-Finance score for distant travel to see the surgeon. Additionally, all categories of the PODCI (upper extremity, mobility, sports, pain, happiness, and global) demonstrated a negative correlation with IOFS. PROMIS upper extremity and peer relations also demonstrated an inverse relationship with IOFS, whereas PROMIS pain interference had a positive correlation with IOFS. The overall IOFS for children with CoULDs was greater than previously reported for children with brachial plexus birth injury, and less than cerebral palsy and congenital heart disease. Caregivers of children with congenital upper extremity differences report a significant impact on family life. Socioeconomic factors, such as economically disadvantaged or single-caregiver households, and clinical factors, such as bilateral upper extremity involvement, correlate with greater family impact. These findings represent opportunities to identify at-risk families and underscore the importance of caring for the whole family through a multidisciplinary approach. Prognostic II.

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Electrodiagnostic Severity is Not Associated with PROMIS Upper Extremity, PROMIS Pain Interference and PROMIS Pain Intensity.

Background: The primary objective of this study was to determine the association between preoperative electrodiagnostic study (EDS) parameters and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instruments in patients with EDS-confirmed carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Methods: A retrospective study of 45 patients with EDS-confirmed CTS was conducted. Patients completed the PROMIS Upper Extremity, PROMIS Pain Interference and PROMIS Pain Intensity. Explanatory variables included EDS disease severity (mild, moderate and severe), sensory peak latency, sensory amplitude, motor latency, motor amplitude, the presence of nonrecordable sensory latency and the presence of nonrecordable sensory amplitude. Explanatory variables also included patient-related factors, such as age, sex and diabetes mellitus. Associations between variables were assessed using simple linear regression, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student's t-test. Results: In our cohort, the EDS severity was mild in 38%, moderate in 42% and severe in 20% of patients. The mean PROMIS Upper Extremity score was 44.4, the mean PROMIS Pain Interference score was 53.5 and the mean PROMIS Pain Intensity score was 49.9. Bivariate analysis demonstrated no association between EDS severity overall or any EDS parameter individually and PROMIS Upper Extremity, PROMIS Pain Interference and PROMIS Pain Intensity. Diabetes mellitus was associated with poorer PROMIS Upper Extremity scores. Conclusions: EDS severity is not associated with PROMIS Upper Extremity, PROMIS Pain Interference and PROMIS Pain Intensity. Carpal tunnel release is commonly indicated for pain and dysfunction, but validated measures of pain and dysfunction do not correlate with EDS severity. Level of Evidence: Level III (Diagnostic).

An Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in Non-operative Posterolateral Elbow Dislocations.

The purpose of our study is to analyze the outcomes of traumatic posterolateral elbow dislocations using patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). We hypothesized that physical function (PF) and upper extremity (UE) scores inPROMIS will significantly improve over six months of follow-up and correlate with a positive change in the patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS). This is a seven-year retrospective study of 165 consecutive adult patients with traumatic posterolateral elbow dislocations. Demographic information, PROMIS PF, PROMIS UE, PROMIS pain interference (PI), PROMIS depression, and PASS were recorded over six months of follow-up. At the time of injury, mean PROMIS scores were PF 41.24 (SD 11.16), UE 34.27 (SD 11.87), PI 60.44 (SD 8.07), and depression 49.82 (SD 10.42). At six months, the mean PROMIS scores were PF 39.71 (SD 9.71), UE 33.95 (SD 9.09), PI 57.35 (SD 8.59), and depression 51.43 (SD 10.62). The overall six-month changes in PROMIS scores were PF -1.53, UE -0.32, PI -3.09, and depression +1.61. At the 6-month follow-up, 41.7% responded positively on the PASS, which correlated only with PROMIS PI. Among patients who improved from negative to positive response on PASS, the PROMIS PF, UE, and depression scores did not significantly improve. Only PROMIS PI correlated with PASS at the six-month follow-up; PROMIS PI significantly improved among simple posterolateral elbow dislocation patients at both short-term and long-term follow-up points. PROMIS PF, UE, and depression did not significantly differ between time of injury and short-term and long-term follow-up points.

Non-operative Treatment of Mason Type I Radial Head Fractures: A Comparative Analysis Using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS).

The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of Mason type I radial head fractures. This information will help to provide physicians with a critical decision-making tool when considering non-operative intervention and evaluate Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) as a potentially valuable measure to track outcomes. We retrospectively identified 527 patients undergoing non-operative intervention. Demographic information, physical exam measurements, patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and PROMIS Upper Extremity (UE), Physical Function (PF), and Pain Interference (PI) scores were analyzed over 12 months. At the initial outpatient post-injury visit (within one week of injury), the average PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression were 42.04 (SD: 6.3), 35.31 (SD: 7.3), 59.18 (SD: 9.2), and 48.68 (SD: 6.8), respectively. The average change in PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores from the time of injury to six weeks were -0.23 (p=0.7), 1.43 (p=0.03), -2.1 (p=0.01), and -0.99 (p=0.1). The average change in PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores from the time of injury to six months was -0.56 (p=0.56), 1.84 (p<0.001), -1.84 (p<0.001), and -0.13 (p=0.68). Among patients initially reporting "not acceptable" on PASS and reporting "acceptable" at the six-month visit, the average PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores were 42.14, 38.91, 56.91, and 47.51 respectively. This represents an average difference of 1.11 (p=0.07), 2.82 (p<0.01), -1.19 (p=0.04), and -1.7 (p=0.01) respectively. PROMIS UE and PI significantly improved among Mason I radial head fractures treated non-operatively at both six-week and six-month follow-up points but did not meet the mean clinically important difference (MCID) PROMIS PF did not significantly differ between the time of injury, six-week or six-month follow-up points. Only PROMIS UE correlated with PASS at six-week and six-month follow-up. Among patients who improved from negative to positive responses on PASS, PROMIS UE, and PI significantly improved.

Poster 187: Similar Clinical and Patient Recorded Outcomes Amongst Older Patients over 65 Years of Age Compared to Younger Patients undergoing Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair

Objectives: The purpose of our study was to determine if patients 65 years and over meet the minimally clinical important difference (MCID) for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity (PROMIS-UE), Depression (PROMIS-D), and Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) at similar rates compared to a cohort of younger patients. Methods: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of patients undergoing RCR was performed. Patients with completed preoperative and 6-month follow up postoperative PROMIS scores were included. A cohort of 65 years and older (65&lt;) was compared to a cohort of 64 years and younger (64&gt;=) in terms of their clinical outcomes and PROMIS scores. A propensity matched analysis was then performed, which matched patients 65+ years old 1:1 to a cohort of 50 years or younger via tear size and body mass index (BMI). Results: A total of 318 patients were included with 79 patients ≥ 65 years (69.2 ± 3.4 years, mean ± SD) and 239 patients &lt;65 years (55.1 ± 3.4 years). No significant differences were found in terms of gender, tear thickness, tear size, reoperation rate, retear rate, preoperative PROMIS-UE, PROMIS-PI, and PROMIS D scores, or change in postoperative PROMIS-UE, PROMIS-PI, and PROMIS D after 6 months. In the sub-analysis, 44 patients over 65 years of age were propensity matched to 44 under 50 years of age. No differences were found in PROMIS-UE change, PROMIS-D change, proportion meeting MCID PROMIS UE, and proportion meeting MCID of PROMIS PI after 6 months. Patients in the 65+ years group experienced larger changes in PROMIS PI scores (12.5 ± 9.6 vs 7.2 ± 7.5, p=0.005) while fewer patients experienced significant declines in PROMIS D scores (26% vs 47%, p=0.03). Conclusions: Patients ≥ 65 years experience no differences in reoperation or retear rate when compared to younger patients. Older patients undergoing RCR were more likely to have a larger improvement in pain scores but were less likely to have significant clinical change in their depression scores. With proper patient selection, patients ≥ 65 years can achieve clinically significant improvements 6 months after RCR that is similar to their younger counterparts. [Table: see text][Table: see text][Table: see text]

Patient interpretations vary for questions in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity.

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity (PROMIS-UE) is frequently used in research/clinical care, but how it is understood by patients is unknown. We conducted a qualitative study including 12 cognitive interviews with patients with hand/upper extremity conditions and those purposively sampled for mixed literacy. Using framework analysis, we identified six themes total: difficulty answering questions due to insufficient information; uncertainty about whether to respond with the ability to perform the task with the injured extremity alone, either the injured or healthy extremity, or both; lack of experience doing certain tasks; uncertainty about whether to answer questions based on ability to perform the task with or without adaptive techniques; answering questions based on limitations not related to upper extremity function; and uncertainty regarding whether to answer questions on the basis of ability or pain. This study demonstrates the challenges in completing questionnaires and that variability may limit the reliability, validity and responsiveness of the PROMIS-UE.

Establishing the Patient Acceptable Symptom State in a Nonshoulder Hand and Upper Extremity Population for the QuickDASH and PROMIS UE Computer Adaptive Tests

It is unclear what score thresholds on patient-reported outcomes instruments reflect an acceptable level of upper extremity (UE) function from the perspective of patients undergoing hand surgery. The purpose of this study was to calculate the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) UE Computer Adaptive Test (CAT), version 2.0, in a population who underwent hand surgery. Adult patients who underwent hand surgery between February 2019 and December 2019 at a single academic tertiary institution were identified. QuickDASH and PROMIS UE CAT version 2.0 scores were collected 1 year after surgery, as were separate symptom- and function-specific anchor questions that queried the acceptability of patients' current state. Threshold values predictive of a patient reporting an acceptable symptom state (PASS[+]) were calculated for both instruments using the 75th percentile score for patients in the PASS(+) group and the Youden Index as determined by receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis. A total of 222 patients were included. QuickDASH and PROMIS UE CAT scores differed significantly between the PASS(+) and PASS(-) groups. The 75th percentile method yielded PASS values of <16 for the QuickDASH and >43 for the PROMIS UE CAT for both anchor questions. The ROC analysis yielded PASS estimates of <15.9 to <20.5 for the QuickDASH and >38.1 to >46.2 for the PROMIS UE CAT, with ranges calculated from differing threshold values for each of the 2 anchor questions. The ROC-based estimates demonstrated high levels of model discrimination (area under the curve ≥ 0.80). We propose PASS estimates obtained using the 75th percentile and ROC methods. Specifically, PASS values in the range of 15.9-20.5 for the QuickDASH and 38.1-46.2 for the PROMIS UE CAT version 2.0 should be used when interpreting outcomes at a population level.

Paper 78: Integrating PROM Collection for Shoulder Surgical Patients through the Electronic Medical Record: A Low Cost and Effective Strategy for High Fidelity PROM Collection

Objectives:Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are critical measures of quality of care and treatment outcomes; however, they are challenging to collect without significant financial and administrative investment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and cost of an automated PROM collection through the electronic medical record for shoulder surgery patients in a large, integrated healthcare system.Methods:An existing, electronic medical record (EMR) based, automated, PROM scheduling system was integrated into the surgical check-in workflow for all elective primary total hip, total knee, and partial knee arthroplasty patients from November 2020 through August 2021 at 3 high volume surgical sites in a large, integrated health system. Rates of completion for Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity (PROMIS-UE), Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder (ASES) surveys were determined. No additional staff were hired to assist in PROM collection. In our institution, if the patient had an ambulatory appointment within 25 days prior to surgery, their PROM scores were marked complete and were not reassigned on the day of surgery (DOS). For all other patients, PROMs were assigned by the automated system on DOS.Results:A total of 325 patients with a mean age of 42 + 28 years were included in this study. The vast majority, 94% (306), were assigned surveys on their day of surgery as a result of the automated system. The other 6% (19) had PROM scores completed in the ambulatory setting as they had a pre-operative visit less than 25 days prior to surgery. For patients completing PROMS on their day of surgery, 87% (266/306) completed at least 1 of PROMIS-UE or ASES, while 82% (251/306) completed both. In total 88% (285/325) of patients completed at least 1 PROM on or within 25 days prior to surgery and 85% (277/325) completed both. This entire system cost $5180 to deploy.Conclusions:A native PROM scheduling and collection system was successfully implemented with a survey completion rate of 82% to 95% of patients. This system serves as an efficient, low-cost model for other surgical departments to leverage existing systems to collect day of surgery PROMs.

Evaluation of the PROMIS Upper Extremity Against Validated Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Early Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis

Internal consistency, construct, and criterion validity of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) upper extremity (UE) v1.2 were evaluated in patients with early-stage carpometacarpal (CMC) osteoarthritis (OA). We hypothesized that in patients with early CMC OA, PROMIS UE scores would: (1) be lower than those in asymptomatic controls; (2) correlate with established patient-reported outcomes; (3) correlate with pinch and grip strengths; and (4) not correlate with radiographic disease progression. Patients with early CMC OA (modified Eaton stage 0 or 1) and matched asymptomatic control patients completed the PROMIS UE, Australian and Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index, and Patient-Rated Wrist-Hand Evaluation at 2 time points. The PROMIS UE's internal consistency was evaluated by Cronbach's alpha, construct validity by Spearman correlation coefficients among the patient-reported outcome measures, and criterion validity using measures of strength. A floor or ceiling effect was indicated if more than 15% of patients achieved the lowest or highest possible score. The PROMIS UE had high internal consistency. Patients with early CMC OA had a lower score than healthy controls (average, 42 vs 54, respectively). We observed moderate to high correlations between the PROMIS UEv1.2, Australian and Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index, and Patient-Rated Wrist-Hand Evaluation and good criterion validity when compared to key pinch and grip strengths. The PROMIS UE did not correlate to radiographic disease severity. The PROMIS UE had a high correlation with Australian and Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index and a moderate correlation with Patient-Rated Wrist-Hand Evaluation. The PROMIS UE had high internal consistency and good criterion validity. The PROMIS UE is a valid assessment for disability in patients with early CMC OA and can serve as a clinical adjunct to an outcome assessment.

Establishing the Substantial Clinical Benefit in a Non-Shoulder Hand and Upper Extremity Population for the QuickDASH and PROMIS Upper Extremity and Physical Function Computer Adaptive Tests

It is unclear what score changes on the abbreviated Disabilities of the Arm, Hand, and Shoulder (QuickDASH), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) upper extremity (UE) computer adaptive test (CAT), and PROMIS physical function (PF) CAT represent a substantial improvement. We calculated the substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for these 3 instruments in a non-shoulder hand and upper extremity population. Adult patients treated between March 2015 and September 2019 at a single academic tertiary institution were identified. The QuickDASH, PROMIS UE CAT v2.0, and PROMIS PF CAT v2.0 scores were collected using a tablet computer. Responses to the QuickDASH both at baseline and follow-up 6 ± 4 weeks later, and a response to the anchor question "Compared to your first evaluation at the University Orthopaedic Center, how would you describe your physical function level now?" were required for inclusion. A second anchor question querying treatment-related improvement was also used. The SCB was calculated using an anchor-based approach comparing the mean change difference between groups reporting no change and a maximal change for both anchor questions. Of 1,119 included participants, the mean age was 48 ± 17 years, 53% were women, and half were recovering from surgery. Score changes between baseline and follow-up were significantly different between groups reporting no improvement and maximal improvement on both anchor questions. The SCB values ranged between 16.9 and 22.8 on the QuickDASH, 5.9 and 7.1 on the UE CAT, and 3.5 and 6.7 on the PF CAT. These score improvements for the QuickDASH, UE CAT, and PF CAT represent a substantial clinical improvement in a non-shoulder hand and upper extremity population. These SCB estimates may assist with the interpretation of outcome scores at a population level.

The minimal clinically important difference of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function and upper extremity computer adaptive tests and QuickDASH in the setting of elbow trauma.

BackgroundMinimal clinically important difference (MCID) estimates are useful for gauging clinical relevance when interpreting changes or differences in patient-reported outcomes scores. These values are lacking in the setting of elbow trauma. Our primary purpose was to estimate the MCID of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) computer adaptive test (CAT), the PROMIS upper extremity (UE) CAT, and the QuickDASH using an anchor-based approach for patients recovering from elbow trauma and related surgeries. Secondarily, we aimed to estimate the MCID using the 1/2 standard deviation method.Materials & methodsAdult patients undergoing treatment for isolated elbow injuries between July 2014 and April 2020 were identified at a single tertiary academic medical center. Outcomes, including the PROMIS PF CAT v1.2/2.0, PROMIS UE CAT v1.2, and QuickDASH, were collected via a tablet computer. For inclusion, baseline (6 months before injury up to 11 days postoperatively or after injury) and follow-up (11 to 150 days postoperative or after injury) PF or UE CAT scores were required, as well as a response to an anchor question querying improvement in physical function. The MCID was calculated using (1) an anchor-based approach using the difference in mean score change between anchor groups reporting “No change” and “Slightly Improved/Improved” and (2) the 1/2 standard deviation method.ResultsOf the 146 included patients, the mean age was 46 ± 18 years and 67 (46%) were women. Most patients (129 of 146 or 88%) were recovering from surgery, and the remaining 12% were recovering from nonoperatively managed fractures and/or dislocations. The mean follow-up was 157 ± 192 days. Scores for each instrument improved significantly between baseline and follow-up. Anchor-based MCID values were calculated as follows: 5.7, 4.6, and 5.3 for the PROMIS PF CAT, PROMIS UE CAT, and QuickDASH, respectively. MCID values estimated using the 1/2 standard deviation method were 4.3, 4.8, and 11.7 for the PROMIS PF CAT, PROMIS UE CAT, and QuickDASH, respectively.ConclusionsIn the setting of elbow trauma, we propose MCID ranges of 4.3 to 5.7 for the PROMIS PF CAT, 4.6 to 4.8 for the PROMIS UE CAT, and 5.3 to 11.7 for the QuickDASH. These values will provide a framework for clinical relevance when interpreting clinical outcomes studies, or powering clinical trials, for populations recovering from trauma.

Evaluation of PROMIS Outcomes for Surgical Treatment of Cubital Tunnel Syndrome With and Without Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

Assessment of outcomes for cubital tunnel syndrome (CuTS) surgeries has been difficult due to heterogeneity in outcome reporting. Our objective was to evaluate the outcomes for 2 cohorts treated surgically for isolated CuTS and for combined CuTS and carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) using Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). There were 29 patients in the isolated CuTS cohort and 30 patients in the combined CuTS and CTS cohort. PROMIS Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), Depression, and Upper Extremity (UE) were completed preoperatively and 1-week, 6-weeks, and 3-months postoperatively. Responsiveness was evaluated by standardized response means (SRM). Significant improvements from the 1-week to 6-week postoperative period are shown in the isolated CuTS cohort for PROMIS PF (P = .002), PI (P = .0002), and UE (P = .02), but scores plateau after 6-weeks postoperatively. A similar pattern for the same time points was seen for the combined CuTS and CTS group for PROMIS PF (P = .001), PI (P = .02), and UE (P = .04), with a plateau of scores beyond 6 weeks postoperatively. PROMIS UE was more responsive (SRM range: 0.11-1.03) than the PF (SRM range: 0.02-0.52) and PI (SRM range: 0.11-0.40), which were both mildly responsive for both cohorts. PROMIS lacks the sensitivity to show improvement beyond 6-weeks postoperatively for both isolated CuTS and combined CuTS and CTS. Patients with combined nerve compressions follow similar trajectories in the postoperative period as those with isolated CuTS. Level IV.

The Ability of Upper Extremity Surgeons to Assess Patient’s Functional Status

To compare surgeon and patient assessment of upper extremity functional status at the time of initial consultation. We hypothesized that surgeons and patients demonstrate low levels of agreement with respect to assessing pain scores, functional status, and self-efficacy. One hundred forty-three consecutive new patients were evaluated by 1 of 5 fellowship-trained upper extremity surgeons. Patients completed a Numeric Pain Rating Scale as well as the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity (UE), Pain Interference (PI), and Self-Efficacy (SE) instruments. Surgeons provided their own estimates of patient function on each questionnaire at the conclusion of the visit and were blinded to the results of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for the duration of the study. Estimation errors, which represent the absolute value of the difference between the patient's actual score and the surgeon's estimated score on each questionnaire, were calculated for each questionnaire. As a group, surgeons assumed that the PROMIS UE and SE scores were higher than the patients' actual scores and assumed that patients had lower PROMIS PI scores than were actually reported. Mean estimation errors for all PROMIS instruments were greater than 10 points and larger than the SD for these instruments in the general population. Upper extremity surgeons demonstrate difficulty assessing their patient's self-reported functional status, pain interference, and level of self-efficacy during initial consultations. Although formalized PROMs are infrequently administered in orthopedic clinics, increased utilization of these questionnaires would allow for a more accurate baseline functional assessment. When evaluating new patients in the outpatient clinic, surgeons should recognize the potential limitations of their assessments of patient-reported function.

Evaluating Immediate and Short-Term Postoperative Clinical Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Ulnar Shortening for Ulnar Impaction Syndrome Using PROMIS.

Background The early recovery trajectory of patients undergoing ulnar shortening for ulnar impaction syndrome using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is unknown. Questions/Purposes Using PROMIS Upper Extremity (UE), Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression, we asked (1) do patients undergoing operative management for ulnar impaction syndrome present at their preoperative visit with notable impairment?; (2) At immediate follow-up, do patients present with a clinically appreciable change in symptom severity?; and (3) At short-term follow-up, do patients present with a clinically appreciable change in symptom severity? Materials and Methods We identified patients from 01/2017 to 12/2019 at our institution undergoing ulnar shortening for ulnar impaction syndrome who completed all PROMIS domains at a preoperative visit and at least one postoperative time point (i.e., less than 4 weeks and/or greater than 12 weeks). Distribution- and anchor-based minimal clinically important difference estimates were used to evaluate clinically appreciable changes in symptoms over time. Results A total of 38 patients met our inclusion criteria. The average change in PROMIS UE, PF, PI, and Depression scores from preoperative to immediate postoperative follow-up were -3.8, -4.3, 3.2, and 0.5, respectively. However, by short-term follow-up, the average change in PROMIS UE, PF, PI, and Depression scores were 3.7, 3.2, -4.7, and -3.9, respectively. Conclusions Patients have worsening function at the immediate postoperative follow-up. By short-term postoperative follow-up, functional status and PI levels improve. Our findings can help hand surgeons provide evidence-based guidance on expected initial recovery following operative management for ulnar impaction syndrome. Level of Evidence This is a level II, prognostic study.

Impact of Spinal Deformity Characteristics on Patient-reported Outcome Measurement Information System Scores in Patients With Idiopathic Scoliosis Undergoing Posterior Spinal Fusion.

The impact of posterior spinal fusion (PSF) on physical function and pain and mental health in pediatric patients as quantified by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), developed by the National Institute of Health, is largely unknown. The purpose of this study is to report the changes of PROMIS scores for upper extremity (UE), pain interference (PI), mobility (MOB), and peer relationships (PR) after PSF in patients with idiopathic scoliosis (IS), compare postoperative changes in PROMIS PI and Scoliosis Research Society-30 pain scores, and evaluate associations between curve characteristics and PROMIS scores. A retrospective cohort of 122 patients (<18 years old) who underwent PSF for IS was identified through electronic medical record search. PROMIS scores were obtained preoperatively and 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 years, 2 years, and 3 years postoperatively. The mean age of the cohort was 14.2 ± 1.6 years, and the mean Cobb angle was 62.9 ± 13.8° at surgery. Eighty patients had preoperative PROMIS data. UE and MOB scores were statistically lower at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively and returned to baseline with a longer follow-up. PI scores were significantly lower at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. PR was unchanged up to 2 years postoperatively and then showed significant improvement. There was a statistically significant negative relationships between lowest instrumented vertebra and PROMIS UE and MOB scores at 6 weeks and 1 year postoperatively, but not at a longer follow-up. There were no significant differences noted in PI and PR PROMIS scores and lowest instrumented vertebra. PROMIS scores were not statistically associated with the Lenke Classification, number of vertebral levels fused, or percentage coronal correction. Changes in PROMIS functional domains (UE and MOB) postoperatively normalize at longer follow-ups. Changes in PI and PR demonstrated improvements over preoperative values at 1 to 2 years postoperatively. Preoperative coronal and sagittal measures, and the percentage correction did not correlate with any PROMIS scores.

Correlation of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Questionnaires With the Brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire in Patients With 5 Common Hand Conditions

We evaluated the concurrent validity of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global Mental Health (GMH), Global Physical Health (GPH), Upper Extremity (UE), Pain Interference (PI), and Self-Efficacy for Managing Medications and Treatment (SE-MMT) by analyzing correlation to the brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire (bMHQ) in patients with 5 common hand conditions: carpal tunnel syndrome, Dupuytren contracture, trigger finger, thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis, and wrist ganglion cysts. Our cohort included 11,782 unique visits representing 4,401 patients. Patient demographics, PROMIS Computer Adaptive Test questionnaires, and bMHQ were collected prospectively at all visits for all patients. Spearman rank correlation was used to evaluate the relationship between the PROMIS and bMHQ scores. Multivariable linear regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between questionnaires and patient demographics. The PROMIS UE and PI showed strong correlations to the bMHQ. The PROMIS GPH showed moderate correlation to the bMHQ. The PROMIS GMH and SE-MMT were weakly correlated with the bMHQ. These results for the overall group were consistent across subgroup analysis for each condition, and regression models confirmed these correlation findings when controlling for demographic variables. The bMHQ had the smallest ceiling and floor effects compared with the PROMIS questionnaires. The PROMIS UE, PI, and SE-MMT took significantly less time to complete than the bMHQ. Correlations between the PROMIS questionnaires and the bMHQ were similar regardless of condition. Given their moderate-to-strong correlations with the bMHQ and consistency across conditions, the PROMIS UE and PI may be adequate replacements for the bMHQ for evaluating these domains in both clinical and research applications in patients with these common upper extremity pathologies. The PROMIS GPH, GMH, and SE-MMT, in conjunction with the bMHQ, may provide more information regarding patient's physical and mental health and ability to manage medications and treatment without substantially increasing patient burden. Clinicians and researchers can use these findings to guide questionnaire selection based on the clinical or research question(s) of interest.

Quality of patient-reported outcomes used for quality of life, physical function, and functional capacity in trials of childhood fractures.

This study evaluates the quality of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) reported in childhood fracture trials and recommends outcome measures to assess and report physical function, functional capacity, and quality of life using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) standards. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic review of OVID Medline, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL was performed to identify all PROMs reported in trials. A search of OVID Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO was performed to identify all PROMs with validation studies in childhood fractures. Development studies were identified through hand-searching. Data extraction was undertaken by two reviewers. Study quality and risk of bias was evaluated by COSMIN guidelines and recorded on standardized checklists. Searches yielded 13,672 studies, which were screened to identify 124 trials and two validation studies. Review of the 124 trials identified 16 reported PROMs, of which two had validation studies. The development papers were retrieved for all PROMs. The quality of the original development studies was adequate for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Mobility and Upper Extremity and doubtful for the EuroQol Five Dimension Youth questionnaire (EQ-5D-Y). All other PROMs were found to have inadequate development studies. No content validity studies were identified. Reviewer-rated content validity was acceptable for six PROMs: Activity Scale for Kids (ASK), Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire, PROMIS Upper Extremity, PROMIS Mobility, EQ-5D-Y, and Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL4.0). The Modified Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire was shown to have indeterminate reliability and convergence validity in one study and PROMIS Upper Extremity had insufficient convergence validity in one study. There is insufficient evidence to recommend strongly the use of any single PROM to assess and report physical function or quality of life following childhood fractures. There is a need to conduct validation studies for PROMs. In the absence of these studies, we cautiously recommend the use of the PROMIS or ASK-P for physical function and the PedsQL4.0 or EQ-5D-Y for quality of life. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1599-1607.

Mental health and tobacco use are correlated with PROMIS upper extremity and pain interference scores in patients with shoulder pathology.

To determine whether patient demographics have predictive influence on patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) domains of pain interference (PROMIS-PI), depression (PROMIS-D), and upper extremity (PROMIS-UE) for patients with shoulder pathology treated nonoperatively. Patients with partial rotator cuff tears, impingement, scapular dyskinesia, osteoarthritis, muscle strains, biceps tendonitis, instability, and acromioclavicular arthritis were retrospectively identified. Patients who underwent surgery were excluded. Demographic characteristics were documented, and PROMIS scores before and after nonoperative intervention were analyzed for correlations between each domain. A total of 638 questionnaires (PROMIS-UE, PROMIS-PI, and PROMIS-D) were analyzed. PROMIS-UE had a strong negative correlation with PROMIS-PI (R = - 0.73, P < .001). PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-D demonstrated a positive correlation of moderate strength (R = 0.54, P < .001). Patients who never used tobacco, compared to current or former users, had significantly higher PROMIS-UE scores (34.5 vs. 30.6 and 31.9; P < .001), lower PROMIS-PI (59.7 vs. 63.1 and 60.9; P < .001), and lower PROMIS-D scores (47.3 vs. 52.1 and 49.3; P < .001). Patients with body mass index < 24.8 had significantly higher PROMIS-UE scores than those with > 24.8 (P < .05). There is an inverse relationship between upper extremity physical function and pain and depression, as measured by PROMIS scores. Smoking and increased BMI are significant contributors to worse outcomes in patients with shoulder pathology, even in nonoperative populations. Counseling patients regarding prognosis and functional outcomes is important in managing their expectations in this patient population.

Evaluating the performance of PROMIS and QuickDASH instruments in an intercollegiate Division 1 athlete population

Athletes demonstrate high levels of physical function, leading to difficulties in patient-reported outcome scoring and interpretation. In particular, the ability of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments to adequately discriminate between high levels of upper extremity function-that is, the ceiling effect-is limited. This study evaluated performance characteristics of the shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) survey and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) metrics in a population of Division 1 intercollegiate athletes, with specific attention to ceiling effects. At a single institution, Division I intercollegiate athletes cleared for full participation in the 2018-2019 season were eligible. The following PROs were collected prospectively via tablet computer: PROMIS upper extremity (UE) computer adaptive test (CAT), PROMIS physical function (PF) CAT, QuickDASH, and QuickDASH Sports/Performing Arts Module. Descriptive statistics, and ceiling and floor effects, were calculated. The proportion of athletes with maximal scores on each PRO were compared to normative values using the 1-sample Wilcoxon signed rank test. A total of 268 participants were included; the mean age was 19.9 ± 1.5 years, 49% were female, and 61% were overhead athletes. Large ceiling effects were observed for the UE CAT (46%), QuickDASH (58%), and QuickDASH Sports Module (82%). The PF CAT demonstrated a relatively low ceiling effect of 6.7%. Athlete scores were all significantly better than published age-matched values from a normative population for all instruments, with the exception of no difference on the QuickDASH for males. The PROMIS UE CAT and QuickDash instruments are limited in their ability to assess and discriminate upper extremity function in highly functioning individuals such as Division I athletes. The PROMIS PF CAT, a measure of general physical function, did not suffer from a large ceiling effect.

Use of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) for Operative Shoulder Outcomes.

Background:Few studies have investigated the relationship between the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and legacy patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements.Purpose:To compare patient-reported outcomes from the PROMIS physical function (PF) and upper extremity (UE) platforms against one another and against legacy PRO measurements to assess the potential strengths and weaknesses of the National Institutes of Health PROMIS initiative and expand on the use of PRO measurements in clinical orthopaedic practice.Study Design:Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.Methods:A systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses) guidelines. All English-language studies published between 2017 and 2019 using PROMIS to evaluate patients for shoulder surgery were analyzed. PROs were compared based on survey administered and the shoulder condition being investigated. Study quality was evaluated using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score.Results:We included 9 studies (5 studies were level 2; 3 studies were level 3; 1 study was level 4) encompassing a total of 1130 patients (60.2% male; mean age, 52.6 ± 16.5 years; mean BMI, 29.8 ± 2.8 kg/m2). Of these, 6 studies administered the PROMIS PF, and 6 studies administered the PROMIS UE. The strongest correlation was between PROMIS PF computer adaptive test and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey Global Health (SF-36 GH) (r = 0.75). The highest overall correlation with the PROMIS UE was found with the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Shoulder Score (r = 0.70). The lowest correlations were found between PROMIS PF and the Marx Shoulder Activity Scale (r = 0.08) and the PROMIS UE and the Marx Shoulder Activity Scale (r = 0.18).Conclusion:From available data, the PROMIS PF and PROMIS UE were most closely correlated with outcomes measured by the SF-36 GH. The PROMIS UE alone was most correlated with ASES Shoulder Score. Thus, either PROMIS PF or UE may provide a possible alternative to legacy PRO measurements but with a lower overall number of questions and higher generalizability. Future research should compare the time and question burden of the various PROMIS platforms with a more consistent evaluation of standard PRO measurements.