The responsiveness of the PROMIS instruments and the qDASH in an upper extremity population

• Main Authors: Man Hung, Charles L. Saltzman, Tom Greene, Maren W. Voss, Jerry Bounsanga, Yushan Gu, Angela A. Wang, Douglas Hutchinson, Andrew R. Tyser
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: SpringerOpen 2017-11-01
• Series: Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
• Subjects: Responsiveness; Patient-reported outcomes; PROMIS; qDASH; Physical function; Pain
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41687-017-0019-0

Abstract Background This study evaluated the responsiveness of several PROMIS patient-reported outcome measures in patients with hand and upper extremity disorders and provided comparisons with the qDASH instrument. Methods The PROMIS Upper Extremity computer adaptive test (UE CAT) v1.2, the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) CAT v1.2, the PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) CAT v1.1 and the qDASH were administered to patients presenting to an orthopaedic hand clinic during the years 2014–2016, along with anchor questions. The responsiveness of these instruments was assessed using anchor based methods. Changes in functional outcomes were evaluated by paired-sample t-test, effect size, and standardized response mean. Results There were a total of 255 patients (131 females and 124 males) with an average age of 50.75 years (SD = 15.84) included in our study. Based on the change and no change scores, there were three instances (PI at 3 months, PI >3 months, and qDASH >3 months follow-ups) where scores differed between those experiencing clinically meaningful change versus no clinically meaningful change. Effect sizes for the responsiveness of all instruments were large and ranged from 0.80–1.48. All four instruments demonstrated high responsiveness, with a standardized response mean ranging from 1.05 to 1.63. Conclusion The PROMIS UE CAT, PF CAT, PI CAT, and qDASH are responsive to patient-reported functional change in the hand and upper extremity patient population.