Relationship of age on enjoyment of physical activity in upper extremity illness

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Instruments Compare Favorably With Legacy Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Upper- and Lower-Extremity Orthopaedic Patients: A Systematic Review of the Literature

PURPOSE

To compare Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) with traditional ("legacy") patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in regard to correlations, ease of use, and quality criteria for upper (UE) and lower extremity (LE) orthopaedic conditions.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE database was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify published articles that referenced the various PROMIS PF measures. Two authors independently reviewed selected studies. The search returned 857 studies, 85 of which were selected for independent review by 2 authors. Of these, 54 were selected for inclusion. Mixed linear models were performed to assess for differences between legacy PROMs and PROMIS measures.

RESULTS

The combined sample size of all included studies yielded 6,074 UE and 9,366 LE patients. Overall, PROMIS PF measures demonstrated strong correlations with legacy PROMs among UE (weighted Pearson correlation, 0.624, standard error [SE] = 0.042; weighted Spearman correlation, 0.566, SE = 0.042) and LE patients (weighted Pearson correlation, 0.645, SE = 0.062; weighted Spearman correlation, 0.631, SE = 0.041). PROMIS PF questionnaires completed by UE patients had fewer questions than legacy PROMs (5.9 vs 17.7, P = .0093) and were completed in less time (90.5 vs 223.8 seconds, P = .084). PROMIS PF questionnaires completed by LE patients had fewer questions than legacy PROMs (4.81 vs 15.33, P < .001) and were completed in less time (63.6 vs 203.2 seconds, P = .0063). The differences for the reliability measures were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

PROMIS PF scores correlate strongly with commonly used legacy PROMs in orthopaedics, particularly in UE and LE patients. PROMIS PF forms can be administered efficiently and to a broad patient population while remaining highly reliable. Therefore, they can be justified for standardized use among orthopaedic patients with UE and LE conditions, improving the ability to aggregate and compare outcomes in orthopaedic research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV evidence.

Pain interference may be an important link between pain severity, impairment, and self-reported disability in participants with wrist/hand pain

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

INTRODUCTION

Pain severity, sensory and motor impairment, and psychological (distress and anxiety) and social factors have previously been related to self-reported disability in persons with wrist and hand pain.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study to determine the relative contribution of pain severity, measures of impairment (sensory and motor function), psychosocial factors, and pain interference on self-reported disability experienced by persons with heterogeneous orthopedic injuries and conditions of the wrist and hand.

METHODS

Measures of disability and pain severity as well as measures of sensory (pressure pain thresholds, joint position sense), motor (grip strength, Purdue pegboard), and cognitive performance (Stroop test) and psychosocial variables related to pain and participation (West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory) were administered to 60 participants with wrist and hand pain. Pearson product correlations controlled for age and sex, and multiple linear regression was performed to determine the relationship between measures of impairment, pain severity, psychosocial variables, and pain interference with self-reported disability assessed with the Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire.

RESULTS

The best-fitting regression model with DASH scores entered as the dependent variable (F_4,50 = 28.8, P < .01) included MPI Pain Interference (β = -0.54), Life Control (β = -0.16), Purdue pegboard scores (β = -0.32), and Stroop test times (β = 0.21). Pain Interference had the strongest correlation with self-reported disability (adjusted R² = 0.67, P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Pain interference appears to be an important factor explaining the link between impairment, pain severity, and self-reported disability. Addressing pain interference may be important to improve outcomes in this population.

Attitudes Toward Aging Among Patients With Upper Extremity Illness

Background: An adaptive attitude toward aging might limit symptom intensity and magnitude of limitations. This study sought factors associated with attitudes toward aging (measured with the Brief Aging Perceptions Questionnaire [B-APQ]) and studied the relationship of having an age-related disease to magnitude of limitations, pain intensity, patient satisfaction, and patient comfort with completing a questionnaire about attitudes toward aging. We also looked for a subset of questions from B-APQ that maintained the construct validity and internal consistency of B-APQ, without unacceptable flooring or ceiling effects. Methods: A total of 161 upper extremity patients completed the following questionnaires: B-APQ, Patient Health Questionnaire-Short Form, Pain Self-efficacy-Short Form, Pain Catastrophizing Scale-Short Form, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function-Upper Extremity, pain intensity, satisfaction with the surgeon, and comfort with completing the B-APQ. We created multivariable linear regression models to test for associations. Results: Factors independently associated with less positive perceptions about aging included white race, retired work status, having nonspecific comorbidities, and more catastrophic thinking. Variation in the magnitude of limitations and pain intensity was accounted for by effectiveness of coping strategies rather than attitudes toward aging in particular. A 4-question version of the B-APQ has acceptable performance. Conclusion: Adaptive attitudes toward aging are associated with psychological and social determinants of health. We present a 4-item short form of B-APQ that could be used as a brief measure to assess attitudes toward aging. Interventions to improve adaptiveness to nociception (eg, cognitive behavioral therapy to limit catastrophic thinking) might help with adaptation to age-related changes.

Psychosocial factors affecting variation in patient-reported outcomes after elbow fractures

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with limitations in function measured by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) 6-9 months after elbow fractures in adults from a range of demographic, injury, psychological, and social variables measured within a week and 2-4 weeks after injury.

METHODS

We enrolled 191 adult patients sustaining an isolated elbow fracture and invited them to complete PROMs at their initial visit to the orthopedic outpatient clinic (within a maximum of 1 week after fracture), between 2 and 4 weeks, and between 6 and 9 months after injury; 183 patients completed the final assessment. Bivariate analysis was performed, followed by multivariable regression analysis accounting for multicollinearity. This was evaluated using partial R², correlation matrices, and variable inflation factor assessment.

RESULTS

There was a correlation between multiple variables within a week of injury and 2-4 weeks after injury with PROMs 6-9 months after injury in bivariate analysis. Kinesiophobia measured within a week of injury and self-efficacy measured at 2-4 weeks were the strongest predictors of limitations 6-9 months after injury in multivariable regression. Regression models accounted for substantial variance in all PROMs at both time points.

CONCLUSIONS

Developing effective coping strategies to overcome fears related to movement and reinjury and finding ways of persevering with activity despite pain within a month of injury may enhance recovery after elbow fractures. Heightened fears around movement and suboptimal coping ability are modifiable using evidence-based behavioral treatments.

What Factors Are Associated With Disability After Upper Extremity Injuries? A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Psychosocial factors are key determinants of health after upper extremity injuries. However, a systematic review is needed to understand which psychosocial factors are most consistently associated with disability and how the language, conceptualization, and types of measures used to assess disability impact these associations in upper extremity injuries.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What factors are most consistently associated with disability after upper extremity injuries in adults? (2) What are the trends in types of outcome measures and conceptualization of disability in patients' upper extremity injuries?

METHODS

We searched multiple electronic databases (PubMED, OVIDSP, PsycInfo, Google Scholar, ISI Web of Science) between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 2016, using terms related to the "upper extremity", "outcome measurement", and "impairment, psychological, social or symptomatic" variables. We included all studies involving adult patients with any musculoskeletal injury and excluded those that did not use patient-reported outcome measures. We identified and screened 9339 studies. Of these, we retained 41 studies that involved conditions ranging from fractures to soft tissue injuries in various regions of the arm. We conducted quality assessment using a 10-item validated checklist and a five-tier strength of evidence assessment. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria and registered the review before performing our search (PROSPERO: CRD42017054048). None of the authors received any funding to perform this work.

RESULTS

Disability after upper extremity injury was most consistently associated with depression (21 cohorts), catastrophic thinking (13 cohorts), anxiety (11 cohorts), pain self-efficacy (eight cohorts), and pain interference (seven cohorts). Social and demographic factors were also associated with disability. Measures of impairment such as ROM and injury severity were least associated with disability. There has been a gradual increase in use of region or condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures and measures of psychological, social, and symptomatic factors over a period since the introduction of the World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) around 2000. Approximately 17% of studies (n = 454 of 2628) had instances of unclear, conflicting, or inappropriate terminology and 11% of studies (n = 257 of 2628) involved misrepresentations of outcome measures related to disability.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychologic and social factors are most consistently associated with disability than factors related to impairment. Further research involving the assessment of depression, anxiety, and coping strategies in cohorts with specific injuries may support decision-making regarding the provision of emotional support and psychologic therapies during recovery. Using the WHO ICF framework to conceptualize disability is key in increasing strength of evidence and allowing accurate comparisons of research in this field.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

The use of computer adaptive tests in outcome assessments following upper limb trauma: a systematic review

Aims

Outcome measures quantifying aspects of health in a precise, efficient, and user-friendly manner are in demand. Computer adaptive tests (CATs) may overcome the limitations of established fixed scales and be more adept at measuring outcomes in trauma. The primary objective of this review was to gain a comprehensive understanding of the psychometric properties of CATs compared with fixed-length scales in the assessment of outcome in patients who have suffered trauma of the upper limb. Study designs, outcome measures and methodological quality are defined, along with trends in investigation.

Materials and Methods

A search of multiple electronic databases was undertaken on 1 January 2017 with terms related to "CATs", "orthopaedics", "trauma", and "anatomical regions". Studies involving adults suffering trauma to the upper limb, and undergoing any intervention, were eligible. Those involving the measurement of outcome with any CATs were included. Identification, screening, and eligibility were undertaken, followed by the extraction of data and quality assessment using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) criteria. The review is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria and reg istered (PROSPERO: CRD42016053886).

Results

A total of 31 studies reported trauma conditions alone, or in combination with non-traumatic conditions using CATs. Most were cross-sectional with varying level of evidence, number of patients, type of study, range of conditions and methodological quality. CATs correlated well with fixed scales and had minimal or no floor-ceiling effects. They required significantly fewer questions and/or less time for completion. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) CATs were the most frequently used, and the use of CATs is increasing.

Conclusion

Early studies show valid and reliable outcome measurement with CATs performing as well as, if not better than, established fixed scales. Superior properties such as floor-ceiling effects and ease of use support their use in the assessment of outcome after trauma. As CATs are being increasingly used in patient outcomes research, further psychometric evaluation, especially involving longitudinal studies and groups of patients with specific injuries are required to inform clinical practice using these contemporary measures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:693-702.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System and Legacy Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in the Field of Orthopaedics: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To compare Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) with legacy patient-reported outcome measures with regard to correlations, ease of use, and quality criteria for orthopaedic conditions.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE database was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify published articles that referenced the various PROMIS PF measures. Three authors independently reviewed selected studies. The search returned 130 studies, 44 of which underwent review. Of these, 18 were selected for inclusion. A general linear model and paired t-tests were used to assess for differences between legacy patient-reported outcome measures and PROMIS.

RESULTS

The combined sample size of all articles yielded 3,047 total patients. Overall, PROMIS PF measures and legacy scores showed strong correlations (range: 0.59-0.83) when evaluating upper extremity, lower extremity, and spine patients. PROMIS questionnaires (6.04, standard error [SE] = 0.7) have significantly fewer questions than legacy forms (24.27, SE = 4.36). In lower extremity studies, the PROMIS PF (100.14 seconds, SE = 28.41) forms were completed in significantly less time (P = .03) than legacy forms (243.70 seconds, SE = 45.8). No significant difference was found between the reliabilities of the 2 types of measures.

CONCLUSIONS

PROMIS PF scores correlate strongly, particularly in lower extremity patients, with some of the most commonly used legacy measures in orthopaedics. PROMIS can be administered quicker and applied to a broader patient population while remaining highly reliable.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV evidence.