Assessment of Disability Related to Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome by Use of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Information System (PROMIS) and Objective Measures of Physical Performance

Evaluating Functional Performance Tests in those with Non-arthritic Intra-articular Hip Pain: An International Consensus Statement

Background

Non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain, caused by various pathologies, leads to impairments in range of motion, strength, balance, and neuromuscular control. Although functional performance tests offer valuable insights in evaluating these patients, no clear consensus exists regarding the optimal tests for this patient population.

Purpose

This study aimed to establish expert consensus on the application and selection of functional performance tests in individuals presenting with non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain.

Study Design

A modified Delphi technique was used with fourteen physical therapy experts, all members of the International Society for Hip Arthroscopy (ISHA). The panelists participated in three rounds of questions and related discussions to reach full consensus on the application and selection of functional performance tests.

Results

The panel agreed that functional performance tests should be utilized at initial evaluation, re-evaluations, and discharge, as well as criterion for assessing readiness for returning to sports. Tests should be as part of a multimodal assessment of neuromuscular control, strength, range of motion, and balance, applied in a graded fashion depending on the patient's characteristics. Clinicians should select functional performance tests with objective scoring criteria and prioritize the use of tests with supporting psychometric evidence. A list of recommended functional performance tests with varying intensity levels is provided. Low-intensity functional performance tests encompass controlled speed in a single plane with no impact. Medium-intensity functional performance tests involve controlled speed in multiple planes with low impact. High-intensity functional performance tests include higher speeds in multiple planes with higher impact and agility requirements. Sport-specific movement tests should mimic the patient's particular activity or sport.

Conclusion

This international consensus statement provides recommendations for clinicians regarding selection and utilization of functional performance tests for those with non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain. These recommendations will encourage greater consistency and standardization among clinicians during a physical therapy assessment.

Novel Metrics for Assessing Mobility During Ground-Standing Transitions

INTRODUCTION

Transitioning between the ground and standing is a required activity for many professions including skilled trades, law enforcement, and military service. However, available assessments are limited and focus primarily on quality of movement. Thus, we developed two novel assessments of functional mobility specific for ground-to-standing transitions: Stand-Prone-Standx2 (SPS2) and Stand-Kneel-Standx2 (SKS2-L/R) tests. The purpose of this study was to determine the psychometrics of these two new measures in able-bodied (AB) service members and in service members with unilateral lower extremity injury (LEI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 57 AB service members and 31 service members with a traumatic unilateral LEI wearing a custom carbon-fiber ankle-foot orthosis participated in this study. In total, 36 AB and 18 LEI participants returned for a second session to assess intersession reliability. Intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated for intersession and inter-rater comparisons (two-way random model for consistency and single measure). Additionally, performance was compared between legs and groups.

RESULTS

The SPS2 and SKS2 assessments demonstrated excellent inter-rater and intersession reliability in both the AB and LEI groups with all intraclass correlation coefficient values greater than 0.8. Further, the tests were responsive to deficits associated with LEI, with the LEI group having significantly longer times on all assessments compared to the AB group.

CONCLUSIONS

The SPS2 and SKS2 performance measures were found to have excellent inter-rater and intersession reliability in both AB participants and participants with LEI. Further, participants with LEI performed significantly slower than the AB participants. Excellent reliability and responsiveness to deficits associated with LEI support the use of the SPS2 and SKS2 to assess mobility in individuals with LEI. Transitions between the ground and standing occur in many occupational and daily tasks. These reliable performance measures that assess ground-to-stand transitions can be applied widely, in many populations beyond highly functioning service members with LEI.

Hip Pain and Movement Dysfunction Associated With Nonarthritic Hip Joint Pain: A Revision

The Academy of Orthopaedic Physical Therapy (AOPT), formerly the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA), has an ongoing effort to create evidence-based practice guidelines for orthopaedic physical therapy management of patients with musculoskeletal impairments described in the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). This is an update to the 2014 Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for Hip Pain and Movement Dysfunction Associated with Nonarthritic Hip Joint Pain. The goals of the revision were to provide a concise summary of the contemporary evidence since publication of the original guideline and to develop new recommendations or revise previously published recommendations to support evidence-based practice. This current CPG covers pathoanatomical features, clinical course, prognosis, diagnosis, examination, and physical therapy interventions in the management of nonarthritic hip joint pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(7):CPG1-CPG70. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.0302.

Comparison of the PROMIS and iHOT-12 in Determining Satisfaction Levels After Hip Arthroscopy for FAIS

Background

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has not been fully evaluated for outcomes assessment after hip arthroscopy to correct femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS).

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) and Pain Interference (PI) subscales with the 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) to define patients with 3 unique substantial clinical benefit (SCB) scores-patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction at 1 year after hip arthroscopy for FAIS. We hypothesized that the iHOT-12 would be more accurate than the PROMIS-PF and PROMIS-PI subscales in identifying these 3 patient groups.

Study Design

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

Methods

We reviewed the records of patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for symptomatic FAIS at 3 centers from January 2019 through June 2021 and had 1-year clinical and radiographic follow-up data. Patients completed the iHOT-12, PROMIS-PF, and PROMIS-PI on initial assessment and at 1 year (±30 days) postoperatively. Postoperative satisfaction was reported on an 11-category scale with anchors defined as "0% satisfied" and "100% satisfied." Receiver operator characteristic analysis was performed to determine the absolute SCB values for the iHOT-12 and PROMIS subscales that would most accurately identify those patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction. Area under the curve (AUC) values and 95% CIs for the 3 instruments were compared.

Results

Included were 163 patients (111 [68%] women and 52 [32%] men), with a mean age of 26.1 years. Corresponding absolute SCB scores for patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction were as follows: iHOT-12, 68.4, 72.1, 74.7; PROMIS-PF, 45, 47.7, 49.9; and PROMIS-PI, 55.9, 52.4, 51.9. The AUC ranged between 0.67 and 0.82, with overlapping 95% CIs indicating a minimal difference in accuracy between the 3 instruments. Sensitivity and specificity values ranged between 0.61 and 0.82.

Conclusion

The PROMIS-PF and PROMIS-PI subscales were as accurate as the iHOT-12 in defining absolute SCB scores for patients reporting ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction at 1-year follow-up after hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Is Not as Responsive as Legacy Scores in Detecting Patient Outcomes in Hip Preservation: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To evaluate publication trends of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in hip preservation literature, assess the usage of PROMIS as an outcome measure, and evaluate correlations of all available published PROMIS domains with legacy patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

The PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases were queried for articles evaluating PROMIS scores among hip preservation populations. Inclusion criteria consisted of studies with Level IV evidence or above (per the Sackett et al. levels of evidence), such as case series and cohort studies, reporting on perioperative use of hip PROMIS scores. Exclusion criteria consisted of arthroplasty and trauma studies. Patient demographics, PROMIS usage, and PROMIS Pearson or Spearman correlation coefficients to historic PROs were recorded for each study.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles published between 2017 and 2021 were included in the analysis, with the majority (75%) published between 2020 and 2021. Studies assessing postoperative outcomes had follow-up periods ranging from 6 months to 5 years. The most common PROMIS domain reported was Physical Function (PF), and there was varying usage of other domains including Pain Intensity, Anxiety, and Depression. PROMIS validity was most often assessed in comparison to the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) by calculating the Pearson coefficient, which assumes normal data distribution, or Spearman coefficient, which is rank-based and does not require normal data distribution. Studies comparing PROMIS-PF with mHHS reported Pearson coefficients ranging from 0.49 to 0.72 and Spearman coefficients ranging from 0.67 to 0.71.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been a chronologic increase in PROMIS usage in hip preservation literature. PROMIS demonstrates moderate-to-strong correlations with legacy PROs, but there is substantial heterogeneity in follow-up periods, PROMIS domains used, and statistical methodology. The current data show that PROMIS is not as responsive as historically used, validated PROs in quantitatively assessing function and pain in hip preservation patients.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Surgeons using PROMIS solely should be aware that the score may not be as responsive as legacy PROs in closely assessing improvements or deterioration in patient performance after hip preservation surgery. Rather than being used alone, PROMIS may be useful as a replacement for a group of legacy PROs. Thus, when used alongside select legacy PROs, overall questionnaire burden can be reduced while maintaining a high level of accuracy in assessing health status.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Mobility Computerized Adaptive Testing Maintains High Correlation and Low Test Burden Compared With Legacy Hip-Specific Instruments in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement

PURPOSE

To evaluate the reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness of the lower extremity-specific Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Mobility (MO) bank in patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery at a large academic musculoskeletal specialty center between November 2019 and November 2020 completed the following baseline and 6-month measures: PROMIS MO, PROMIS Pain Interference (PI), PROMIS Physical Function (PF), modified Harris Hip Score, International Hip Outcome Tool 33, visual analog scale, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. Construct validity was evaluated using Spearman correlation coefficients. The number of questions until completion was recorded as a marker of test burden. The percentage of patients scoring at the extreme high (ceiling) or low (floor) for each measure was recorded to measure inclusivity. Responsiveness was tested by comparing differences between baseline and 6-month measures, controlling for age and sex, using generalized estimating equations. Magnitudes of responsiveness were assessed through the effect size (Cohen d).

RESULTS

In this study, 660 patients (50% female patients) aged 32 ± 14 years were evaluated. PROMIS MO showed a strong correlation with PROMIS PF (r = 0.84, P < .001), the International Hip Outcome Tool 33 (r = 0.73, P < .001), PROMIS PI (r = -0.76, P < .001), and the modified Harris Hip Score (r = 0.73, P < .001). Neither PROMIS MO, PROMIS PI, nor PROMIS PF met the conventional criteria for floor or ceiling effects (≥15%). The mean number of questions answered (± standard deviation) was 4.7 ± 2.1 for PROMIS MO, 4.1 ± 0.6 for PROMIS PI, and 4.1 ± 0.6 for PROMIS PF. From baseline to 6 months, the PROMIS and legacy measures exhibited significant responsiveness (P < .05), with similar effect sizes between the patient-reported outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

This longitudinal study reveals that in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy, PROMIS MO computerized adaptive testing maintains high correlation with legacy hip-specific instruments, significant responsiveness to change, and low test burden compared with legacy measures, with no ceiling or floor effects at 6-month postoperative follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective case series.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Test Is Less Responsive Than Legacy Hip-Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Patients Undergoing Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Purpose

To evaluate and compare the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) computerized adaptive test and PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) instruments versus legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome at 1-year follow-up.

Methods

Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome without concomitant procedures performed by a single surgeon between August 2018 and January 2019 were identified. The PROMIS PF score, PROMIS PI score, Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living Subscale (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score–Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score were obtained preoperatively and at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. Bivariate correlation analyses between PROMIS and legacy PROMs were performed. The floor and ceiling effects, responsiveness, and relative efficiency (RE) of each PROM were calculated.

Results

This study included 124 patients with an average age of 32.7 ± 12.3 years. The PROMIS PF score showed very good correlations with the HOS-ADL (r = 0.73, P < .001) and mHHS (r = 0.70, P < .001) and good correlations with the HOS-SS (r = 0.62, P < .001), iHOT-12 score (r = 0.62, P < .001), and VAS pain score (r = –0.64, P < .001). The PROMIS PI score showed very good inverse correlations with the HOS-ADL (r = –0.72, P < .001) and mHHS (r = –0.79, P < .001) and good correlations with the HOS-SS (r = –0.64, P < .001), iHOT-12 score (r = –0.65, P < .001), and VAS pain score (r = 0.65, P < .001). No floor effect was observed for any measure. Ceiling effects were not observed in the PROMIS PROMs but were detected for the HOS-ADL (16.1%) and mHHS (19.3%). The effect size was large for all outcomes: iHOT-12 score, d = 1.77; HOS-ADL, d = 1.37; HOS-SS, d = 1.45; PROMIS PI score, d = 1.05; and PROMIS PF score, d = 1.01. The iHOT-12 score was more responsive than the PROMIS PI score (RE = 1.69), PROMIS PF score (RE = 1.75), HOS-ADL (RE = 1.29), and HOS-SS (RE = 1.22).

Conclusions

At 1-year follow-up, PROMIS PROMs displayed very good correlations with legacy PROMs. However, PROMIS PROMs had lower effect sizes and were not as responsive as legacy PROMs.

Level of Evidence

Level II, development of diagnostic criteria on the basis of consecutive patients.

PROMIS Versus Legacy Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Sports Medicine Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Knee, Shoulder, and Hip Interventions: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) was designed to monitor the global wellbeing of patients, with the Physical Function Computer-Adaptive Test (PF-CAT) component focused specifically on functional outcome. PROMIS aims for increased item-bank accuracy, lower administrative burden, and decreased floor and ceiling effects compared to legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Our primary research outcomes focused on sports medicine surgical populations, which may skew younger or have wide-ranging functional statuses. Specifically, for this population, we questioned if PROMIS PF-CAT was equal to legacy PROMs in (1) construct validity and (2) convergent/divergent validities; and superior to legacy PROMs with respect to (3) survey burden and (4) floor and ceiling effects.

METHODS

Searches were performed in April 2019 in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, utilizing PubMed, Cochrane Central, and Embase databases for Level I-III evidence. This resulted in 541 records, yielding 12 studies for inclusion. PROM data was available for patients undergoing arthroscopic orthopaedic procedures of the knee, shoulder, and hip. Measures of construct validity, convergent/divergent validity, survey burden, and floor/ceiling effects were evaluated for PROMIS PF-CAT versus legacy PROMs.

RESULTS

PROMIS PF-CAT demonstrated excellent or excellent-good correlation with legacy PROMS for physical function and quality of life for patients undergoing arthroscopic interventions of the knee, shoulder, and hip. Compared to legacy PROM instruments, PROMIS PF-CAT demonstrated the lowest overall survey burden and had the lowest overall number of floor or ceiling effects across participants.

CONCLUSION

PROMIS PF-CAT is an accurate, efficient evaluation tool for sports medicine surgical patients. PROMIS PF-CAT strongly correlates with legacy physical function PROMs while having a lower test burden and less incidence of floor and ceiling effects. PROMIS PF-CAT may be an optimal alternative for traditional physical function PROMs in sports medicine patients undergoing arthroscopic procedures. Further studies are required to extend the generalizability of these findings to patients during postoperative timepoints after shoulder and hip interventionsLevel of Evidence: III.

Preoperative Performance of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System in Patients with Meniscal Root Tears

The purpose of this study was to establish preoperative validity of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function computer adaptive test (PROMIS PF-CT) with legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for meniscal root tears (MRTs). Our study included 51 patients (52 knees) with MRT. Patients completed PROMIS PF-CT, Short Form 36 (SF-36 physical function, pain, general health, vitality, social function, emotional well-being, role limitations due to physical health, and role limitations due to emotional problems), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS pain, symptoms, activities of daily living [ADLs], sports, and quality of life [QOL]), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC pain, stiffness, and function), EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D), and Knee Activity Scale questionnaires at their preoperative visit. Correlations between the PROMs listed above were evaluated along with floor and ceiling effects. Correlations were defined as weak (0.2-0.39), moderate (0.4-0.59), strong (0.6-0.79), and very strong (0.8-1.0). Preoperative data showed that PROMIS PF-CT has a strong correlation with SF-36 PF, KOOS-ADL, WOMAC-function, and EQ-5D; and moderate correlation with KOOS-sport, KOOS-pain, KOOS-symptoms, KOOS-QOL, WOMAC-pain, and WOMAC-stiffness. The Knee Activity Scale did not show any significant correlation with PROMIS PF-CT (r = 0.12, p = 0.2080). Of all the PROMs administered, PROMIS PF-CT demonstrated no floor or ceiling effects compared with 11.54% ceiling effect in KOOS-sports, and 5.77% floor effect in KOOS-ADL. On average, patients answered fewer PROMIS PF-CT questions (4.15 ± 0.72). PROMIS PF-CT is a valuable tool to assess preoperative patient-reported physical function in patients that may undergo MRT repair. It correlates strongly with other well-established PROMs. It also demonstrated no floor or ceiling effects and demonstrated a low test burden in our sample of 52 knees. This is a level III, prognostic retrospective comparative study.

Physical Performance Tests Correlate With Patient-reported Outcomes After Periacetabular Osteotomy: A Prospective Study

Introduction:

Individuals with hip dysplasia report significant functional disability that improves with periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). Four physical performance measures (PPMs) have been recently validated for use with nonarthritic hip conditions; however, their ability to detect functional improvement and correlate with improvements in popular hip-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments after PAO is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the responsiveness of four PPMs up to 1 year after PAO, compare PPMs with established PRO measures at these time points, and report the acceptability and utility of PPMs for assessing outcomes after PAO.

Methods:

Twenty-two participants aged 15 to 39 years completed the timed stair ascent (TSA), sit-to-stand five times (STS5), self-selected walking speed, four-square-step test, and seven hip-specific PRO measures before surgery and at approximately 6 months and 1 year after PAO. They completed questions regarding acceptability and utility of both types of testing. Wilcoxon rank sum test and unpaired Student t-tests were used to assess differences between time points; Spearman correlation and generalized linear modeling were used to determine the relationship between PPMs and PRO measures.

Results:

Six months after PAO, participants showed significant improvements on all seven PRO instruments (P < 0.001) and on the STS5 (P = 0.01). At one year, these improvements were maintained and TSA also improved (P = 0.03). Improvement in other PPMs did not reach significance (P = 0.07 and 0.08). The STS5 test demonstrated moderate to strong correlation (|r| = 0.43 to 0.76, P < 0.05) with all PRO measures, and the TSA test demonstrated moderate to strong correlation with almost all measures (|r| = 0.43 to 0.58, P < 0.05). Correlations strengthened on subanalysis of participants with unilateral disease (n = 11) (|r| = 0.56 to 0.94, P < 0.05). All participants (100%) found PPM testing acceptable despite disability; 25% preferred PPMs to PRO measures, whereas 75% of participants found them equal in usefulness.

Discussion:

The STS5 and TSA tests demonstrated moderate to very strong correlation with PRO measures at six and 12 months after PAO for dysplasia. These tests could be used as a functional outcome to supplement PRO instruments after PAO.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Validation in Hip Arthroscopy: A Shift Towards Reducing Survey Burden

Background The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was developed to provide measures of patient-reported symptoms and healthcare outcomes across a variety of conditions in an easily accessible manner. The purpose of this study was to validate PROMIS against traditional legacy measures in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoral acetabular impingement (FAI). Methodology Outcome measures collected pre- and post-operatively included PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) and Physical Function (PF), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living and Sport (HOS-ADL and HOS-Sport), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated between each outcome measure. Results Strong correlations were observed between the PROMIS PF T-Score and the mHHS (r = 0.64-0.83, p < 0.0001), HOS-ADL (r = 0.54-0.81, p < 0.0001), HOS-Sport (r = 0.55-0.74, p < 0.0001), and NAHS (r = 0.61-0.78, p < 0.0001) measurement tools. PROMIS Computer Adaptive Testing PI T-Score and VAS also demonstrated a strong correlation (r = 0.64-0.80, p < 0.0001). Conclusions PROMIS PF scores correlate strongly with mHHS, HOS-ADL, HOS-Sport, and NAHS scores at all time points. Likewise, PROMIS PI scores correlate strongly with VAS pain scores. On average, patients completing PROMIS need to fill out only four or five questions. This study supports the use of PROMIS as an efficient, valid outcome tool for patients with FAI undergoing hip arthroscopy.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Clinically Important Outcome Values in Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Defining success in hip arthroscopy through patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is complicated by the wide range of available questionnaires and overwhelming amount of information on how to interpret scores. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) are collectively known as clinically important outcome values (CIOVs). These CIOVs provide benchmarks for meaningful improvement. The aims of this review were to update the evidence regarding joint-specific PROMs used for hip arthroscopy and to collate available CIOVs in this population.

METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed to identify studies reporting measurement properties of PROMs utilized for hip arthroscopy. Metrics of reliability, validity, and responsiveness were extracted and graded according to an international Delphi study. Questionnaire interpretability was evaluated through CIOVs.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were reviewed. One study validated a novel questionnaire, 3 studies validated existing questionnaires, and 22 studies reported CIOVs. The most evidence supporting interpretability was found for the Hip Outcome Score (HOS, 11 studies), modified Harris hip score (mHHS, 10 studies), and International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12, 9 studies). Scores indicative of the smallest perceptible versus substantial clinically relevant changes were reported for the iHOT-12 (12 to 15 versus 22 to 28), iHOT-33 (10 to 12 versus 25 to 26), HOS-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL, 9 to 10 versus 10 to 16), HOS-Sports (14 to 15 versus 25 to 30), and mHHS (7 to 13 versus 20 to 23). Absolute postoperative scores indicative of an unsatisfactory versus a desirable outcome were reported for the iHOT-12 (below 56 to 63 versus above 86 to 88), iHOT-33 (below 58 versus above 64 to 82), HOS-ADL (below 87 to 92 versus above 94), HOS-Sports (below 72 to 80 versus above 78 to 86), and mHHS (below 74 to 85 versus above 83 to 95).

CONCLUSIONS

Six questionnaires had reported clinically important outcome thresholds, with the HOS, mHHS, and iHOT-12 having the most information to support score interpretation. Thresholds for the HOS, mHHS, iHOT-12, and iHOT-33 describe desirable absolute PROM scores and minimum and substantial change scores within 5 years following hip arthroscopy. Despite substantial heterogeneity in calculation methodology, included cohorts, and follow-up time, available interpretability values could be meaningfully summarized.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In light of increasing use of PROMs in orthopaedics, a summary of the available CIOVs provides guidance for clinicians in mapping numerical scores from PROMs onto clinical benchmarks.

Improving Interpretation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Scale for Specific Tasks in Community-Dwelling Older Adults

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

New generic patient-reported outcomes like the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) are available to physical therapists to assess physical function. However, the interpretation of the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) T-score is abstract because it references the United States average and not specific tasks. The purposes of this study were to (1) determine convergent validity of the PROMIS PF scale with physical performance tests; (2) compare predicted performance test values to normative data; and (3) identify sets of PROMIS PF items similar to performance tests that also scale in increasing difficulty and align with normative data.

METHODS

Community-dwelling older adults (n = 45; age = 77.1 ± 4.6 years) were recruited for this cross-sectional analysis of PROMIS PF and physical performance tests. The modified Physical Performance Test (mPPT), a multicomponent test of mostly timed items, was completed during the same session as the PROMIS PF scale. Regression analysis examined the relationship of mPPT total and component scores (walking velocity, stair ascent, and 5 times sit to stand) with the PROMIS PF scale T-scores. Normative data were compared with regression-predicted mPPT timed performance across PROMIS PF T-scores. The PROMIS PF items most similar to walking, stair ascent, or sit to stand were identified and then PROMIS PF model parameter-calibrated T-scores for these items were compared alongside normative data.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

There were statistically significant correlations (r = 0.32-0.64) between PROMIS PF T-score and mPPT total and component scores. Regression-predicted times for walking, stair ascent, and sit-to-stand tasks (based on T-scores) aligned with published normative values for older adults. Selected PF items for stair ascent and walking scaled well to discriminate increasing difficulty; however, sit-to-stand items discriminated only lower levels of functioning.

CONCLUSIONS

The PROMIS PF T-scores showed convergent validity with physical performance and aligned with published normative data. While the findings are not predictive of individual performance, they improve clinical interpretation by estimating a range of expected performance for walking, stair ascent, and sit to stand. These findings support application of T-scores in physical therapy testing, goal setting, and wellness plans of care for community-dwelling older adults.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Has a Lower Effect Size and is Less Responsive Than Legacy Hip Specific Patient Reported Outcome Measures Following Arthroscopic Hip Surgery

PURPOSE

To compare the use and responsiveness of Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to legacy patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) at 6-month follow-up.

METHODS

Data from patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with routine capsular closure between August 2018 and January 2019 for the treatment of FAIS were analyzed. Preoperative outcomes, 6-month postoperative outcomes, and demographics were recorded. Primary outcome measures included PROMIS Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), PROMIS Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI), and PROMIS Depression. The legacy PROMs included Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score Sport Subscale (HOS-SS), and the international hip outcome tool 12 questions (iHOT-12). Floor and ceiling effects along with the responsiveness and Cohen's d effect size of each PROM tool were calculated.

RESULTS

Ninety-six patients with an average age and body mass index of 32.4 ± 11.9 years and 25.9 ± 6.1 kg/m², respectively, were included in the final analysis. All outcomes were significantly higher at 6 months compared with the preoperative level (P < .001) except for PROMIS Depression (P = .873). PROMIS-PF demonstrated excellent correlation with HOS-SS (r = 0.81; P < .001), very good correlation with HOS-ADL (r = 0.73; P < .001), and good correlation with iHOT-12 (r = 0.68; P < .001). No floor was observed for any measure. The effect size was large for all outcomes, except PROMIS Depression (d = 0.04), but largest for iHOT12 (d = 1.87) followed by HOS-ADL (d = 1.29). The iHOT-12 was more responsive than PROMIS-PI (relative efficiency [RE] = 3.95), PROMIS-PF (RE = 4.13), HOS-ADL (RE = 2.26), and HOS-SS (RE = 3.84). HOS-SS was similarly responsive to PROMIS-PI (RE=1.03) and PROMIS-PF (RE=1.08). However, PROMIS-PF was overall the least responsive.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients at 6 months postoperatively from hip arthroscopy for FAIS, iHOT-12 was the most responsive and had the largest effect size. In contrast, PROMIS-PF had a lower effect size compared with legacy hip-specific PROMs. Additionally, PROMIS-PF did not correlate as well with iHOT-12 compared with HOS-SS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

Reporting and utilization of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) measures in orthopedic research and practice: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information SystemⓇ (PROMISⓇ) is a dynamic system of psychometrically sound patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. There has been a recent increase in the use of PROMIS measures, yet little has been written about the reporting of these measures in the field of orthopedics. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review to determine the uptake of PROMIS measures across orthopedics and to identify the type of PROMIS measures and domains that are most commonly used in orthopedic research and practice.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus using keywords and database-specific subject headings to capture orthopedic studies reporting PROMIS measures through November 2018. Our inclusion criteria were use of PROMIS measures as an outcome or used to describe a population of patients in an orthopedic setting in patients ≥ 18 years of age. We excluded non-quantitative studies, reviews, and case reports.

RESULTS

Our final search yielded 88 studies published from 2013 through 2018, with 57% (50 studies) published in 2018 alone. By body region, 28% (25 studies) reported PROMIS measures in the upper extremity (shoulder, elbow, hand), 36% (32 studies) reported PROMIS measures in the lower extremity (hip, knee, ankle, foot), 19% (17 studies) reported PROMIS measures in the spine, 10% (9 studies) reported PROMIS measures in trauma patients, and 6% (5 studies) reported PROMIS measures in general orthopedic patients. The majority of studies reported between one and three PROMIS domains (82%, 73 studies). The PROMIS Computerized Adaptive Test (CAT) approach was most commonly used (81%, 72 studies). The most frequently reported PROMIS domains were physical function (81%, 71 studies) and pain interference (61%, 54 studies).

CONCLUSION

Our review found an increase in the reporting of PROMIS measures over the recent years. Utilization of PROMIS measures in orthopedic populations is clinically appropriate and can facilitate communication of outcomes across different provider types and with reduced respondent burden.

REGISTRATION

The protocol for this systematic review was designed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and is registered with the PROSPERO database (CRD42018088260).

Periacetabular osteotomy with or without arthroscopic management in patients with hip dysplasia: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial

Background

Hip dysplasia is one of the most common causes of hip arthritis. Its incidence is estimated to be between 3.6 and 12.8% (Canadian Institute for Health Information, Hip and knee replacements in Canada, 2017–2018: Canadian joint replacement registry annual report, 2019; Jacobsen and Sonne-Holm, Rheumatology 44:211–8, 2004). The Periacetabular Osteotomy (PAO) has been used successfully for over 30 years (Gosvig et al., J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:1162–9, 2010), but some patients continue to exhibit symptoms post-surgery (Wyles et al., Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:336–50, 2017). A hip arthroscopy, performed using a small camera, allows surgeons to address torn cartilage inside the hip joint. Although both procedures are considered standard of care treatment options, it is unknown whether the addition of hip arthroscopy improves patient outcomes compared to a PAO alone. To delay or prevent future joint replacement surgeries, joint preservation surgery is recommended for eligible patients. While previous studies found an added cost to perform hip arthroscopies, the cost-effectiveness to Canadian Health care system is not known.

Methods

Patients randomized to the experimental group will undergo central compartment hip arthroscopy prior to completion of the PAO. Patients randomized to the control group will undergo isolated PAO. Patient-reported quality of life will be the primary outcome used for comparison between the two treatment groups as measured by The International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) (Saberi Hosnijeh et al., Arthritis Rheum 69:86–93, 2017). Secondary outcomes will include the four-square step test and sit-to-stand (validated in patients with pre-arthritic hip pain) and hip-specific symptoms and impairment using the HOOS; global health assessment will be compared using the PROMIS Global 10 Score; health status will be assessed using the EQ-5D-5L and EQ VAS questionnaires (Ganz et al., Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:264–72, 2008) pre- and post-operatively. In addition, operative time, hospital length of stay, adverse events, and health services utilization will be collected. A sub-group of patients (26 in each group) will receive a T1rho MRI before and after surgery to study changes in cartilage quality over time. A cost-utility analysis will be performed to compare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with the intervention.

Discussion

We hypothesize that (1) concomitant hip arthroscopy at the time of PAO to address central compartment pathology will result in clinically important improvements in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) versus PAO alone, that (2) additional costs associated with hip arthroscopy will be offset by greater clinical improvements in this group, and that (3) combined hip arthroscopy and PAO will prove to be a cost-effective procedure.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03481010. Registered on 6 March 2020. Protocol version: version 3.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Instruments Correlate Better With Legacy Measures in Knee Cartilage Patients at Postoperative Than at Preoperative Assessment

PURPOSE

To define the psychometric properties of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression computer adaptive tests (CATs) in patients undergoing knee cartilage surgical procedures.

METHODS

The PROMIS PF, PI, and Depression CATs were administered preoperatively and at 6 months alongside legacy knee patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing knee cartilage surgical procedures. Statistical analysis consisted of the time to completion, psychometric analysis for correlative strengths, absolute and relative floor and ceiling effects, and Cohen effect size.

RESULTS

Our study included 250 patients (57.2% male patients), averaging 1.87, 1.53, and 1.91 minutes for completion of the PF, PI, and Depression CATs, respectively. Preoperatively, the PROMIS PF and PI CATs showed wide ranges of correlation coefficients with respect to function (r = 0.14-0.72 and r = 0.29-0.77, respectively) and health-related quality-of-life PROMs (r = 0.64-0.70). At 6 months, the PROMIS PF CAT (r = 0.82-0.93) and PI CAT (r = 0.77-0.93) both exhibited excellent correlations with respect to legacy function and health-related quality-of-life PROMs except for the Marx Activity Rating Scale (r = 0.36-0.44). None of the PROMIS instruments exhibited any significant floor or ceiling effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The PROMIS PF, PI, and Depression CATs performed better with respect to legacy PROMs in the postoperative period than the preoperative period. In addition, the PROMIS PF and PI measures performed best with respect to the International Knee Documentation Committee questionnaire, and no floor or ceiling effects were identified for the PROMIS instruments. The PROMIS instruments may be more suited to track outcomes postoperatively than to establish preoperative baselines in cartilage surgery patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective case series.

Sleep quality and nocturnal pain in patients with femoroacetabular impingement and acetabular dysplasia

Background

Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome and acetabular dysplasia (AD) are common pathologies that lead to pain in the young adult hip. Nocturnal pain in these patients is often reported, yet little is known regarding the effect of these hip pathologies on overall sleep quality. The purpose of this study was to evaluate sleep quality in patients with AD and FAI syndrome.

Methods

This cross-sectional study consisted of 115 patients who complained of hip pain secondary to either FAI syndrome or AD. One hundred fifteen patients with hip pain secondary to FAI syndrome and AD were assessed using the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), Modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and then Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). Sleep quality was assessed using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Multiple linear regression, with adaptive LASSO variable selection, was used to assess factors associated with sleep quality.

Results

Of the 115 patients, 62 had a diagnosis of FAI syndrome and 53 with AD. The mean age was 34.55 ± 11.66 (age range: 14 to 58 years), 76.52% had an ASA classification of 1 (ASA range: 1 to 3), and all Tonnis grades were either 0 or 1. The mean PSQI global score for all patients was 8.46 ± 4.35 (PSQI range: 0 to 21), indicating poor sleep quality. The adaptive LASSO-penalized least squares multiple linear regression revealed that HOOS Pain, SF-12 Role Emotional, and SF-12 Mental Health significantly predicted Sleep Quality (Adjusted R2 = 0.4041). Sleep quality improved as pain, emotional problems, and mental health improved.

Conclusion

Patients with symptomatic FAI syndrome and AD have poor sleep quality. Worsening pain from a patient’s hip pathology is associated with poor sleep, even prior to the onset of osteoarthrosis of the hip. Patients presenting with hip pain from FAI syndrome and AD should be screened for sleep disturbance and may benefit from a multidisciplinary treatment approach.

Assessment of Disability Related to Hip Dysplasia Using Objective Measures of Physical Performance

Background:

Lower extremity physical performance measures (PPMs), which can objectively quantify functional ability, are an attractive adjuvant to patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments. However, few tests have been validated for use in hip instability.

Purpose:

To evaluate 4 different PPMs for their ability to differentiate between young adults with hip dysplasia indicated for treatment with periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) and asymptomatic controls and to test inter- and intratest reliability and relationship with popular hip PRO instruments.

Study Design:

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

Methods:

A total of 24 symptomatic patients aged 15 to 39 years (100% female) with hip dysplasia (lateral center-edge angle <25°) indicated for treatment with PAO completed the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome (HOOS) Pain subscale, HOOS Short Version (HOOS PS), International Hip Outcome Tool Short Version (iHOT-12), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) and pain interference (PI), and 4 physical function tests: (1) self-selected walking speed (SSWS), sit-to-stand 5 times (STS5), (3) 4-square step test (FSST), and (4) timed stair ascent (TSA). A further 21 young, asymptomatic adults aged 18 to 39 years (91% female) also underwent testing. Between-group comparisons were made with unpaired t test with Bonferroni-Holm correction. Inter- and intrarater reliability was assessed in 38 participants by repeating PPMs at a second visit and using 2 raters. Spearman rank correlation coefficients were used to determine associations between PPMs and PRO instruments.

Results:

Significant differences between patients with hip dysplasia and controls were observed for all PRO instruments (HOOS Pain, 47.8 vs 99.2; HOOS PS, 61.9 vs 99.2; iHOT-12, 32.2 vs 99.2; mHHS, 54.5 vs 90.6; PROMIS PF, 41.4 vs 65.6; and PROMIS PI, 62.0 vs 39.1 [all P < .001]), and all PPMs (SSWS, 1.21 vs 1.53 m/s; STS5, 10.85 vs 5.95 s; FSST, 6.59 vs 4.03 s [all P < .001]; and TSA, 4.58 vs 3.29 s [P = .002]). All 4 PPMs demonstrated excellent intra- and intertest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.83-0.99). STS5, FSST, and TSA were correlated highly (r > 0.5) with physical function PRO instruments, including PROMIS PF, mHHS, and iHOT-12.

Conclusion:

Patients with symptomatic hip dysplasia demonstrated significant impairment on functional testing compared with asymptomatic controls, and performance measure testing demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability. Timed stair ascent and sit-to-stand testing in particular were correlated strongly with physical function PRO instruments. PPMs may be a viable and well-received adjuvant to PRO instrument administration for patients with nonarthritic hip conditions, and investigation of the ability of PPMs to assess surgical outcomes for hip dysplasia is warranted.

Mobile Phone Administration of Hip-Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments Correlates Highly With In-office Administration

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments typically are delivered via paper or computer; we validated administration of hip-specific instruments over a mobile phone software communication platform outside a clinical encounter.

METHODS

Consecutive patients (n = 69) presenting to a hip preservation clinic completed the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Short Form physical function and pain subscales (HOOS-PS and HOOS-PAIN) using standard collection techniques. The subsequent day, patients completed these instruments via a text messaging software program. Text reminders were sent to encourage completion of unanswered questions. Correlation between in-office and mobile phone delivery of PROs was assessed.

RESULTS

The intraclass correlation coefficient between in-clinic and mobile phone delivery of HOOS-PS and HOOS-PAIN was 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.81) and 0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.87), respectively. Completion rate of 93% (64 of the 69) was observed using mobile phone and software messaging. Nine patients completed their PRO after being sent a text message reminder. Fifty-one percent of patients completed all PRO questions within 5 minutes; 26% took between 5 and 10 minutes, and 16% took 10 to 30 minutes for completion.

DISCUSSION

HOOS-PS and HOOS-PAIN PRO instruments administered via text messaging with automated reminders demonstrate good to excellent reproducibility, no minimal detectable change between communication methods, and a high completion rate in adolescents and young adults with hip pain. Mobile phone delivery via automated software may be a valid method for administration of other PROs, allowing for communication with patients anytime and anywhere.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

Correction of mildly dysplastic hips with periacetabular osteotomy demonstrates promising outcomes, achievement of correction goals, and excellent five-year survivorship

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), radiological measurements, and total hip arthroplasty (THA)-free survival in patients who underwent periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for mild, moderate, or severe developmental dysplasia of the hip.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective study involving 336 patients (420 hips) who underwent PAO by a single surgeon at an academic centre. After exclusions, 124 patients (149 hips) were included. The preoperative lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) was used to classify the severity of dysplasia: 18° to 25° was considered mild (n = 20), 10° to 17° moderate (n = 66), and < 10° severe (n = 63). There was no difference in patient characteristics between the groups (all, p > 0.05). Pre- and postoperative radiological measurements were made. The National Institute of Health's Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) outcome measures (physical function computerized adaptive test (PF CAT), Global Physical and Mental Health Scores) were collected. Failure was defined as conversion to THA or PF CAT scores < 40, and was assessed with Kaplan-Meier analysis. The mean follow-up was five years (2 to 10) ending in either failure or the latest contact with the patient.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in PROMs for moderate (p = 0.167) or severe (p = 0.708) groups compared with the mild dysplasia group. The numerical pain scores were between 2 and 3 units in all groups at the final follow-up (all, p > 0.05). There was no significant difference (all, p > 0.05) in the proportion of patients achieving target correction for the LCEA between groups. The mean correction was 12° in the mild, 15° in the moderate (p = 0.135), and 23° in the severe group (p < 0.001). Failure-free survival at five years was 100% for mild, 79% for moderate, and 92% for severely dysplastic hips (p = 0.225).

CONCLUSION

Although requiring less correction than hips with moderate or severe dysplasia, we found PAO for mild dysplasia to be associated with promising PROMs, consistent with that of the general United States population, and excellent survivorship at five years. Future studies should compare these results with the outcome after arthroscopy of the hip in patients with mild dysplasia. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):16-22.

Relationship Between PROMIS Computer Adaptive Tests and Legacy Hip Measures Among Patients Presenting to a Tertiary Care Hip Preservation Center

BACKGROUND

Legacy hip outcome measures may be burdensome to patients and sometimes yield floor or ceiling effects. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computer adaptive tests (CATs) allow for low-burden data capture and limited ceiling and floor effects.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the PROMIS CAT domains demonstrate correlation against commonly used legacy patient-reported outcome measures in a population of patients presenting to a tertiary care hip preservation center. The authors hypothesized the following: (1) PROMIS CAT scores based on physical function (PF), pain interference (PIF), pain behavior, and pain intensity would show strong correlation with the following legacy scores: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12), Hip Outcome Score (HOS) Sports and Activities of Daily Living subscales, and Veterans RAND-6D (VR-6D) utility measure. (2) The mental and physical health portions of the VR-6D legacy measure would show weak correlation with mental- and psychosocial-specific PROMIS elements-depression, anxiety, fatigue, sleep, and ability to participate in social roles and activities. (3) All PROMIS measures would exhibit fewer floor and ceiling effects than legacy scores.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Prospective data were collected on 125 patients in the hip preservation clinics. Enrollees completed legacy scores (visual analog scale for pain, mHHS, iHOT-12, HOS, and VR-6D) and PROMIS CAT questionnaires (PF, PIF, pain behavior, anxiety, depression, sleep, social roles and activities, pain intensity, fatigue). Spearman rank correlations were calculated, with r_s values of 0 to 0.3 indicating negligible correlation; 0.3 to 0.5, weak correlation; 0.5 to 0.7, moderately strong correlation; and >0.7, strong correlation. Floor and ceiling effects were evaluated.

RESULTS

As anticipated, the PF-CAT yielded strong correlations with the iHOT-12, mHHS, HOS-Sports, HOS-Activities of Daily Living, and VR-6D, with r_s values of 0.76, 0.71, 0.81, 0.87, and 0.71, respectively. The PIF-CAT was the only pain score to show moderately strong to strong correlation with all 14 patient-reported outcome measures. A strong correlation was observed between the VR-6D and the social roles and activities CAT ( r_s = 0.73). The depression CAT had a significant floor effect at 19%. No additional floor or ceiling effect was present for any other legacy or PROMIS measure.

CONCLUSION

The PF-CAT shows strong correlation with legacy patient-reported outcome scores among patients presenting to a tertiary care hip preservation center. The PIF-CAT also correlates strongly with legacy and PROMIS measures evaluating physical and mental well-being. PROMIS measures are less burdensome and demonstrate no floor or ceiling effects, making them a potential alternative to legacy patient-reported outcome measures for the hip.