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

Utilization of patient reported outcomes measurement information system in plastic and reconstructive surgery research

BACKGROUND

The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) was developed by investigators funded by the National Institutes of Health as a standardized means of directly assessing the patients' perspectives across domains. PROMIS domains include physical function, pain, fatigue, emotional distress, and social health. Various studies have reported increased utilization of PROMIS in research articles in specific specialties; however, the extent to which PROMIS has been employed in the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery remains unclear. The goal of the present study was to characterize the prevalence and trends of PROMIS within plastic and reconstructive surgery articles.

METHODS

Literature search was conducted across multiple databases for PROMIS studies within plastic surgery literature. We identified 136 articles and the following data were extracted: author name, journal, impact factor, country of origin, year of publication, publication type, subspecialty, study size, and PROMIS measures used.

RESULTS

In this study, 136 studies met the inclusion criteria. There was an overall increasing trend in the number of PROMIS studies published. The most common subspecialties that used PROMIS measures were general reconstruction (n = 24), hand (n = 9), and burn (n = 5). The most used PROMIS measures were the pain interference (n = 26), pain intensity (n = 15), and depression (n = 13). A total of 24 journals included PROMIS studies with a mean impact factor of 3.73 (SD = 3.2). The most common country of origin was the United States (n = 42).

CONCLUSION

The data demonstrated an increasing use of PROMIS within plastic surgery across a wide variety of subspecialities and study designs. The characterization of these trends allows researchers and clinicians alike to gain a greater understanding of this powerful tool in measuring patient care.

Effects of increased body mass index on one year outcomes following soft tissue arthroscopic shoulder instability repair

Background

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of high body mass index on the 1-year minimal outcome following arthroscopic shoulder stabilization.

Methods

Patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) between 2017 and 2021 were identified and assigned to 1 of 3 cohorts based on their preoperative body mass index: normal (18-25), overweight (25-30), and obese (>30). The primary outcomes assessed were postoperative shoulder instability and revision rates. The 3 groups were compared using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) upper extremity, pain interference, pain intensity, Clinical Global Impression scores, visual analog scale pain scores, and shoulder range of motion at 1 year postoperatively.

Results

During the study period, 142 patients underwent ABR and had an average age of 35 ± 10 years. Obese patients had a higher percentage of partial rotator cuff tears (60% vs. 27%, odds ratio: 3.2 [1.1, 9.2]; P = .009), longer mean operative time (99.8 ± 40.0 vs. 75.7 ± 28.5 minutes; P < .001), and shorter time to complication (0.5 ± 0 vs. 7.0 ± 0 months; P = .038). After controlling for confounding factors, obesity was associated with a lesser improvement in upper extremity function scores (obese vs. normal: -4.9 [-9.4, -0.5]; P = .029); although this difference exists, found future studies are needed to determine the clinical significance. There were no differences in patient reported outcome measures, recurrence rate, or revision surgery rates between cohorts at any time point (P > .05).

Conclusion

Obesity is an independent risk factor for longer operative times but does not confer a higher risk of recurrent instability, revision surgery, or lower outcome scores 1 year following ABR.

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.

Determining the Time Required to Achieve Clinically Significant Outcomes on the PROMIS Upper Extremity Questionnaire After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair

Background

Clinically significant outcome (CSO) thresholds for the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System-Upper Extremity (PROMIS-UE) score have been previously defined after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR). However, the time required to achieve CSOs for the PROMIS-UE score is unknown.

Purpose

To (1) determine the time required to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) score thresholds after RCR for the PROMIS-UE questionnaire and (2) identify patient factors associated with earlier or delayed achievement of these clinical benchmarks.

Study Design

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A prospectively maintained institutional database was retrospectively reviewed for consecutive patients who underwent RCR between January 2018 and January 2019. Patients were included if they completed the PROMIS-UE questionnaire both preoperatively and at standardized postoperative time intervals: 5 to 7 months (6-month time point), 11 to 13 months (1-year time point), and ≥23 months (2-year time point). Kaplan-Meier survival curves with interval censoring were used to define the cumulative percentage of patients who achieved the MCID, SCB, and PASS. Patient variables associated with earlier or delayed achievement of the MCID, SCB, and PASS were determined using Weibull parametric survival regression analysis.

Results

Included were 105 patients undergoing RCR (age, 57.3 ± 10.3 years; body mass index, 31.5 ± 6.1 kg/m²). By 2-year follow-up, the cumulative percentage of patients achieving the MCID, SCB, and PASS was 86.7%, 76.2%, and 74.3%, respectively. The mean time required to reach the MCID, SCB, and PASS score thresholds was 9.5 ± 3.8, 10.3 ± 4.4, and 9.8 ± 4.6 months, respectively. Factors associated with delayed achievement of CSOs included greater baseline PROMIS-UE score (MCID and SCB) and workers' compensation insurance (PASS). Greater baseline PROMIS-UE scores were associated with earlier achievement of the PASS.

Conclusion

Most patients achieved CSOs for the PROMIS-UE within 12 months of RCR. Patient-specific factors found to be associated with earlier or delayed achievement of CSOs can be used to inform patient discussions on the expected timeline for recovery after RCR.

Preoperative Opioid Use Is Associated With Inferior Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Scores Following Rotator Cuff Repair

PURPOSE

To determine the influence of preoperative opioid use on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores pre- and postoperatively in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR).

METHODS

A retrospective review of all RCR patients aged >18 years old was performed. PROMIS pain interference ("PROMIS PI"), upper extremity function ("PROMIS UE"), and depression ("PROMIS D") scores, were reviewed. These measures were collected at preoperative, 6-month, and 1-year postoperative time points. A prescription drug-monitoring program was queried to track opioid prescriptions. Patients were categorized as chronic users, acute users, and nonusers based on prescriptions filled. Comparison of means were carried out using analysis of variance and least squares means. Effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 184 patients who underwent RCR were included. Preoperatively, nonusers (n = 92) had superior PROMIS UE (30.6 vs 28.9 vs 26.1; P < .05) and PI scores (61.5 vs 64.9 vs 65.3; P < .001) compared with acute users (n = 65) and chronic users (n = 27), respectively. At 6 months postoperatively; nonusers demonstrated significantly greater PROMIS UE (41.7 vs 35.6 vs. 33.5; P < .001), lower PROMIS D (41.6 vs 45.8 vs 51.1; P < .001), and lower PROMIS PI scores (50.7 vs 56.3 vs 58.1; P < .01) when compared with acute and chronic users, respectively. Nonusers had lower PROMIS PI (47.9 vs 54.3 vs 57.4; P < .0001) and PROMIS D (41.6 vs 48.3 vs 49.2; P = .0002) scores compared with acute and chronic users at 1-year postoperatively. Nonusers experienced a significantly greater magnitude of improvement in PROMIS D 6 months postoperatively compared with chronic opioid users (-5.9 vs 0.0; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing RCR demonstrated superior PROMIS scores pre- and postoperatively if they did not use opioids within 3 months before surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective comparative trial.

PROMIS Upper Extremity underperforms psychometrically relative to American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score in patients undergoing primary rotator cuff repair

BACKGROUND

A number of patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) instruments are used to assess shoulder pain, function, and postoperative satisfaction. Computer adaptive tests (CATs) have been developed in an effort to tailor question delivery, decrease time to completion and floor/ceiling effects, and increase compliance. Previous investigations have demonstrated excellent correlation between Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity CAT (UE-CAT) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) instruments, indicating that the PROMIS UE-CAT may be an acceptable alternative to the ASES. Prior to widespread adoption, however, rigorous psychometric validation must be performed. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of PROMIS UE-CAT relative to the ASES score in patients undergoing primary rotator cuff repair (RCR).

METHODS

A retrospective study of an institutional RCR registry was performed from July 2018 through March 2019. Preoperative PROMIS UE-CAT and ASES scores were collected. Floor and ceiling effects were determined, and convergent validity was established through Pearson correlations. Rasch partial credit modeling was used for psychometric analysis of the validity of PROMIS UE-CAT and ASES question items, a previously established methodology for assessing shoulder PROMs. Person-item maps were generated to characterize the distribution of question responses along the latent dimension of shoulder disability.

RESULTS

Responses from 107 patients (107 shoulders) were included. PROMIS UE-CAT had a strong correlation to ASES (r = 0.684; P < .001), with a 3.7% floor effect and no ceiling effect; ASES had no floor or ceiling effects. PROMIS UE-CAT person-item maps revealed excellent test item coverage between floor and ceiling effects; however, all PROMIS UE-CAT items except "Difficulty putting on a jacket" demonstrated nonsequentially ordered responses, indicating poor reliability of item responses corresponding to shoulder function. Although PROMIS UE-CAT initially demonstrated superior instrument efficiency with fewer test items for overall equivalent coverage of shoulder function assessment, final models after recursive item elimination revealed the ASES instrument to have more well-fitting items over a broader range of shoulder function.

CONCLUSION

Despite its overall strong correlation with ASES and equivalent coverage between floor and ceiling effects, the psychometric properties of PROMIS UE-CAT indicate a need for optimization of individual test items to correspond to shoulder function. Until further refinements in the PROMIS UE-CAT instrument are made, it should not replace the ASES instrument in patients undergoing primary RCR.