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

Linking QuickDASH and PROMIS Upper-Extremity Computer-Adaptive Test Scores in Hand Surgery: A Crosswalk Study

PURPOSE

Assessment of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for hand and upper-extremity surgery patients using measures such as the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (qDASH), as well as general measures including the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Physical Function domain via a Computer-Adaptive Test (PROMIS UE CAT), has become commonplace. The aim of this study was to link, for crosswalking, the qDASH measure to both versions of the PROMIS UE CAT (v1.2 and v2.0).

METHODS

We included 18,944 hand and upper-extremity patients who completed both versions of the PROMIS UE CAT and the qDASH at the same clinical encounter. Shoulder pathology was excluded. Score linkage was performed using the R package equate, and multiple equating models (linear regression, identity, mean, linear, equipercentile, and circle-arc models) were used to establish crosswalk tables.

RESULTS

Mean qDASH and PROMIS UE CAT v1.2 scores were 38.2 (SD = 23.1) and 36.6 (SD = 9.8), respectively. Mean qDASH and PROMIS UE CAT v2.0 scores were 37.3 (SD = 21.8) and 38.3 (SD = 10.4), respectively. Pearson correlations had very strong linear relationships between the qDASH and the PROMIS UE CAT v1.2 and PROMIS UE CAT v2.0 (r = -0.83 [-0.84, -0.92] and r = -0.80 [-0.81, -0.80], respectively). For the equipercentile equating models, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) had very strong positive relationships to linking measures with ICC = 0.85 (0.84, 0.86) for the qDASH-UE CAT v1.2 crosswalk and ICC = 0.83 (0.82, 0.84) for the qDASH-UE CAT v2.0 crosswalk.

CONCLUSIONS

The linkages establish crosswalk tables using equipercentile equating models to convert the PROMIS UE CAT v1.2 and v2.0 scores to the qDASH and vice versa.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study provides crosswalk tables for commonly collected PROMs in hand surgery, increasing the comparability of results between centers using different PROMs to study the same conditions or treatments.

Diagnosis and management of thoracic outlet syndrome in athletes

The physical demands of sports can place patients at elevated risk of use-related pathologies, including thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS). Overhead athletes in particular (eg, baseball and football players, swimmers, divers, and weightlifters) often subject their subclavian vessels and brachial plexuses to repetitive trauma, resulting in venous effort thrombosis, arterial occlusions, brachial plexopathy, and more. This patient population is at higher risk for Paget-Schroetter syndrome, or effort thrombosis, although neurogenic TOS (nTOS) is still the predominant form of the disease among all groups. First-rib resection is almost always recommended for vascular TOS in a young, active population, although a surgical benefit for patients with nTOS is less clear. Practitioners specializing in upper extremity disorders should take care to differentiate TOS from other repetitive use-related disorders, including shoulder orthopedic injuries and nerve entrapments at other areas of the neck and arm, as TOS is usually a diagnosis of exclusion. For nTOS, physical therapy is a cornerstone of diagnosis, along with response to injections. Most patients first undergo some period of nonoperative management with intense physical therapy and training before proceeding with rib resection. It is particularly essential for ensuring that athletes can return to their baselines of flexibility, strength, and stamina in the upper extremity. Botulinum toxin and lidocaine injections in the anterior scalene muscle might predict which patients will likely benefit from first-rib resection. Athletes are usually satisfied with their decisions to undergo first-rib resection, although the risk of rare but potentially career- or life-threatening complications, such as brachial plexus injury or subclavian vessel injury, must be considered. Frequently, they are able to return to the same or a higher level of play after full recovery.

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

PURPOSE

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSIONS

We propose PASS estimates obtained using the 75th percentile and ROC methods.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

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.

Evaluation of Fluoroscopically Guided Transforaminal Selective Nerve Root Sleeve Injections for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis With Radiculopathy Utilizing Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System as an Outcome Measure

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the therapeutic effect of transforaminal selective nerve root sleeve injections (TFSNRIs) in a specific subset of patients with clinical symptoms and presentation consistent with spinal stenosis.

DESIGN

Retrospective review.

SETTING

Tertiary academic spine center.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 176 patients with radicular leg pain with or without low back pain as well as ≥3 clinical features of spinal stenosis and corroborative radiographic features of spinal stenosis on lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging without confounding spinal pathology (N=176).

INTERVENTIONS

Fluoroscopically guided transforaminal selective nerve root sleeve injections.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) v1.2/v2.0, Pain Interference (PI) v1.1, and PROMIS (D) v1.0 were collected at baseline and post-procedure short term (<3-months) and long-term (6-12 month) follow-up. Statistical analysis comparing baseline and postprocedural PROMIS scores was performed. Differences were compared with previously established minimal clinically important differences in the spine population.

RESULTS

For patients with spinal stenosis treated with TFSNRI, no statistically significant improvement was observed short- and long-term follow-up in PROMIS PF (P=.97, .77) and PROMIS Depression (P=.86, .85) scores. At short-term follow-up, PROMIS PI scores did significantly improve (P=.01) but the average difference of pre- and post-procedure scores did not reach clinical significance. No significant difference in PROMIS PI was noted at long-term follow-up (.75).

CONCLUSIONS

Although a statistically significant difference was observed for improvement in pain, in this retrospective study, TFSNRI did not provide clinically significant improvement in patients' function, pain, or depression for lumbar spinal stenosis at short- and long-term follow-up.

Evaluating Factors Associated With Patient-Perceived Applicability of the QuickDASH Survey in Reflecting Their Goals of Care Prior to Hand Surgery

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcome measures intend to capture patients' perspectives on their health status. However, the patient-perceived applicability of many of these patient-reported outcome measures is unknown. We hypothesized that patients experiencing greater upper extremity disability and greater pain interference would be more likely to report that the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH) survey content is responsive to their daily lives and goals in seeking surgical care.

METHODS

Adult preoperative hand surgery patients at a single tertiary academic center were recruited prospectively. QuickDASH, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference computerized-adaptive-testing, and the Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire (GLTEQ)-a validated adult physical activity level metric-data were collected. The following two Likert response questions were also asked: question (1) "How applicable is the above questionnaire to your treatment goals for your upper extremity condition?" and question (2) "How applicable is the overall questionnaire to your daily life?" Multivariable binary logistic regression was performed to define the factors associated with patients reporting that the survey was "very applicable."

RESULTS

Of the 133 included patients, the mean age was 49 ± 18 years, 40% were women, and the mean GLTEQ score was 54.1 ± 5.5 (consistent with a high level of activity). For questions 1 and 2, 32% and 29% of the patients reported that QuickDASH was "very applicable," respectively. The multivariable model demonstrated that for every 10-point increase in QuickDASH, there was a 45% to 49% greater odds of respondents reporting that the survey was "very applicable," and for every 5-point increase in pain interference computerized-adaptive-testing, the odds increased by 55% to 70%. No association with GLTEQ was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with greater upper extremity disability and pain interference were more likely to find the QuickDASH content to be applicable to their daily lives and goals in seeking surgical care.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that QuickDASH may not be an optimal instrument when evaluating upper extremity function in cohorts with mild disability and low pain interference.

QuickDASH and PRWE Are Not Optimal Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Distal Radial Fracture Due to Ceiling Effect: Potential Implications for Future Research

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the floor and ceiling effects for both the QuickDASH (shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] questionnaire) and the PRWE (Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation) following a distal radial fracture (DRF). Secondary aims were to determine the degree to which patients with a floor or ceiling effect felt that their wrist was "normal" according to the Normal Wrist Score (NWS) and if there were patient factors associated with achieving a floor or ceiling effect.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients in whom a DRF was managed at the study center during a single year was undertaken. Outcome measures included the QuickDASH, PRWE, EuroQol-5 Dimensions-3 Levels (EQ-5D-3L), and NWS.

RESULTS

There were 526 patients with a mean age of 65 years (range, 20 to 95 years), and 421 (80%) were female. Most patients were managed nonsurgically (73%, n = 385). The mean follow-up was 4.8 years (range, 4.3 to 5.5 years). A ceiling effect was observed for both the QuickDASH (22.3% of patients with the best possible score) and the PRWE (28.5%). When defined as a score that differed from the best available score by less than the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the scoring system, the ceiling effect increased to 62.8% for the QuickDASH and 60% for the PRWE. Patients who had a ceiling score on the QuickDASH and the PWRE had a median NWS of 96 and 98, respectively, and those who had a score within 1 MCID of the ceiling score reported a median NWS of 91 and 92, respectively. On logistic regression analysis, a dominant-hand injury and better health-related quality of life were the factors associated with both QuickDASH and PRWE ceiling scores (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The QuickDASH and PRWE demonstrate ceiling effects when used to assess the outcome of DRF management. Some patients achieving ceiling scores did not consider their wrist to be "normal." Future research on patient-reported outcome assessment tools for DRFs should aim to limit the ceiling effect, especially for individuals or groups that are more likely to achieve a ceiling score.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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

PURPOSE

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These SCB estimates may assist with the interpretation of outcome scores at a population level.

Linking AM-PAC Mobility and Daily Activity to the PROMIS Physical Function Metric

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to link Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) Mobility and Daily Activity scales to the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) allowing for a common metric across scales.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of patients 18 years and older presenting to 1 of 8 outpatient rehabilitation clinics in southwestern Pennsylvania. Patients completed one survey with questions from the AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility short forms, and the PROMIS PF item bank. Using item response theory, 2 rounds of fixed-parameter calibration were performed. In the first, the AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility items were calibrated with 27 fixed item parameters from the PROMIS PF. Second, the AM-PAC Daily Activity items were calibrated with 11 PROMIS Upper Extremity fixed item parameters. This process uses the construct of physical function and equates AM-PAC items on the same underlying measurement scale for the PROMIS PF.

RESULTS

Both scales measured a wide range of functioning and demonstrated good calibration. Data were appropriate for a fixed-parameter item response theory-based crosswalk. AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility raw scores were mapped onto the PROMIS PF metric. AM-PAC Daily Activity scores were also mapped onto the PROMIS PF Upper Extremity metric.

CONCLUSION

Question items from the AM-PAC Daily Activity, AM-PAC Mobility, and PROMIS PF similarly measure the construct of physical function. This consistency allows for a crosswalk of AM-PAC scores onto the PROMIS PF metric.

IMPACT

Crosswalk tables developed in this study allow for converting scores from the AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility scales to the PROMIS PF metric. This will facilitate monitoring of longitudinal change in function over time and across settings.