Can the Knee Outcome and Osteoarthritis Score (KOOS) Function Subscale Be Linked to the PROMIS Physical Function to Crosswalk Equivalent Scores?

Developing Linkages Between PROMIS Physical Function CAT and QuickDASH Scores in Hand Surgery: A Crosswalk Study

BACKGROUND

There is no standardization within hand and upper-extremity surgery regarding which patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are collected and reported. This limits the ability to compare or combine cohorts that utilize different PROMs. The aim of this study was to develop a linkage model for the QuickDASH (shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) and PROMIS PF CAT (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function computerized adaptive testing) instruments to allow interconversion between these PROMs in a hand surgery population.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted to identify adults (≥18 years old) who had completed the QuickDASH and PROMIS PF CAT instruments at the same clinical encounter. Patients with shoulder pathology were excluded. The linear relationship between scores was evaluated with use of the Pearson correlation coefficient. Linking was performed with use of several common methods, and an optimal linkage model was recommended on the basis of a higher R 2 , strong intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and lower standard error (SE). The recommended model was further evaluated in subgroups based on age (<60 or ≥60 years), sex, etiology for presentation (traumatic versus atraumatic), and treatment type (operative versus nonoperative).

RESULTS

A total of 15,019 patients (mean age, 49 years; 54% female; 86% White) were included. The mean QuickDASH score (and standard deviation) was 37 ± 22, and the mean PROMIS PF CAT score was 45 ± 10. There was a strong negative linear relationship between the QuickDASH and PROMIS PF CAT (r = -0.73). The circle-arc linkage model demonstrated good accuracy and reliability (R 2 = 0.55; ICC = 0.71), and crosswalk tables were developed from this model. The subgroup analysis demonstrated age-related bias in the linkage model (root expected mean squared difference, 0.12). To address this, a separate crosswalk table was developed, which was dichotomized by age category.

CONCLUSIONS

The QuickDASH and PROMIS PF CAT scores were successfully linked. Utilization of the developed crosswalks-one specific to patients <60 years old and another specific to patients ≥60 years old-will allow for score interconversion in future meta-analyses and multicenter hand surgery studies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

A systematic review of crosswalks for converting patient-reported outcome measure scores in hip, knee, and shoulder replacement surgery

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

 We aimed to systematically review studies of crosswalks for converting patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores used in joint replacement, and develop a database of published crosswalks.

METHODS

 4 electronic databases were searched from January 2000 to May 2023 to identify studies reporting the development and/or validation of crosswalks to convert PROM scores in patients undergoing elective hip, knee, or shoulder replacement surgery. Data on study and sample characteristics, source and target PROMs, and crosswalk development and validation methods were extracted from eligible studies. Study reporting was evaluated using the Mapping onto Preference-based measures reporting Standards (MAPS) checklist.

RESULTS

17 studies describing 35 crosswalks were eligible for inclusion. Unidirectional crosswalks were available to convert hip-specific (Oxford Hip Score [OHS]) and knee-specific (Oxford Knee Score [OKS]) scores to the EQ-5D-3L/EQ-5D-5L. Similar crosswalks to convert disease-specific scores (WOMAC) to the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and ICECAP-O Capability Index were identified. Bidirectional crosswalks for converting OHS and OKS to the HOOS-JR/HOOS-12 and KOOS-JR/KOOS-12, for converting WOMAC to the HOOS-JR/KOOS-JR, and for converting HOOS-Function/KOOS-Function to the PROMIS-Physical Function were also available. Additionally, crosswalks to convert generic PROM scores from the UCLA Activity Scale to the Lower Extremity Activity Scale in both directions were available. No crosswalks were identified for converting scores in shoulder replacement. Development methods varied with the type of target score; most studies used regression, item response theory, or equipercentile equating approaches. Reporting quality was variable, particularly for methods and results items, impacting crosswalk application.

CONCLUSION

 This is the first synthesis of published crosswalks for converting joint-specific (OHS, OKS, HOOS, KOOS), disease-specific (WOMAC), and generic PROMs scores (PROMIS-Physical Function, UCLA Activity Scale, Lower Extremity Activity Scale) used to assess joint replacement outcomes, providing a resource for data harmonization and pooled analysis. Crosswalks were developed using regression methods (9 studies), equipercentile equating methods (5 studies), a combination of equipercentile equating and item response theory methods (2 studies), and a combination of regression and equipercentile equating methods (1 study). A range of crosswalk validation approaches were adopted, including the use of external datasets, separate samples or subsets, follow-up data from additional time points, or bootstrapped samples. Efforts are needed to standardize crosswalk methodology and achieve consistent reporting.

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.

Crosswalk between the PROMIS physical function CAT and PROMIS upper extremity CAT v1.2 in a hand surgery population

BACKGROUND

There is no gold standard patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) in hand surgery. As a result, a diverse array of PROM instruments have been utilized across centers over time. Lack of score interchangeability limits the ability to compare or conglomerate scores when new instruments are introduced. Our aim was to develop a linkage for the PROMIS UE CAT v1.2 and PROMIS PF CAT scores and develop crosswalk tables for interconversion between these PROMs.

METHODS

Retrospective review was conducted to identify adult (≥ 18y) patients seen by orthopaedic hand surgeons at a single academic tertiary care hospital who had completed PROMIS UE CAT v1.2 and PROMIS PF CAT score at the same visit. For those with multiple visits, only one randomly selected visit was included in the analyses. Pearson's correlation was calculated to determine the linear relationship between the scores. Linkage from PF to UE was performed utilizing several commonly utilized equating models (identity, mean, linear, equipercentile and circle-arc methods). The performance of the models was assessed using intraclass correlation (ICC) between observed PROMIS UE CAT v1.2 and estimated PROMIS UE CAT v1.2 scores generated using the model as well as Root Mean Square Error (RMSE). The model chosen as the 'best' was further assessed for population invariance using root expected mean squared difference (REMSD) where < 0.08 were considered good.

RESULTS

Of 10,081 included patients, mean age was 48.3 (SD = 17.0), and 54% were female (5,477/10,081). Mean UE CAT v1.2 and PF CAT scores were 37 (SD = 9.8) and 46 (SD = 10.0), respectively. There was a strong correlation between the scores (Pearson correlation r = 0.70). All methods performed acceptably (ICC ≥ 0.66 and RMSE < = 7.52 for all). The equipercentile method had the highest ICC (ICC = 0.70 (95% CI 0.69-0.71)) while the mean and circle arc methods had the lowest RMSE. The circle arc method is the most reliable with the smallest standard error and has satisfactory population invariance across age group (REMSD 0.065) and sex (REMSD 0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

Crosswalk tables to be used for bidirectional conversion between scores were created.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system instruments in knee arthroplasty patients: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to provide a systematic review of the literature pertaining to Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) validation and utilization as an outcomes metric in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients. This is the first systematic review on PROMIS use in total knee arthroplasty patients.

METHODS

A systematic search of the Pubmed/MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Study characteristics, patient demographics, psychometric properties (Pearson and Spearman correlation) with legacy patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) instruments, floor and ceiling effects, responsiveness, and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and PROMIS outcomes were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies investigating PROMIS in 11,140 patients were included. The weighted-average Pearson correlation coefficient comparing PROMIS domains with legacy patient-reported outcome measurements in total knee arthroplasty patients was 0.62 [standard error (SE) = 0.06] and the weighted-average Spearman correlation comparing PROMIS domains with legacy patient-reported outcome measurements in total knee arthroplasty patients was 0.59 (SE = 0.06), demonstrating moderate-to-strong correlation and validity. There were no differences in weighted average floor [0.03% (SE = 3.1) versus 0% (SE = 0.1) versus 0.01% (SE = 1.1); p = 0.25] or ceiling effects [0.01% (SE = 0.7) versus 0.02% (SE = 1.4) versus 0.04% (SE = 3.5); p = 0.36] between PROMIS and legacy instruments. The weighted average for percentage of patients achieving MCID was 59.1% for global physical health (GPH), 26.0% for global mental health (GMH), 52.7% for physical function (PF), 67.2% for pain interference (PI), and 37.2% for depression.

CONCLUSION

Notably, PROMIS global physical health, physical function, and pain interference were found to be significantly responsive, with PROMIS pain interference most effectively capturing clinical improvement as evidenced by the achievement of MCID.

Challenges and Opportunities for the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Orthopaedic Pediatric and Sports Medicine Surgery

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential tools in assessing treatment response, informing clinical decision making, driving healthcare policy, and providing important prognostic data regarding patient health status change. These tools become essential in orthopaedic disciplines, such as pediatrics and sports medicine, given the diversity of patient populations and procedures. However, the creation and routine administration of standard PROMs alone do not suffice to appropriately facilitate the aforementioned functions. Indeed, both the interpretation and optimal application of PROMs are essential to provide to achieve greatest clinical benefit. Contemporary developments and technologies surrounding PROMs may help augment this benefit, including the application of artificial intelligence, novel PROM structure with improved interpretability and validity, and PROM delivery methods that provide increased access to patients resulting in greater compliance and data acquisition yields. Despite these exciting innovations, several challenges remain in this realm that must be addressed to continue to advance the clinical usefulness and subsequent benefit of PROMs. This review will highlight the opportunities and challenges surrounding contemporary PROM use in the orthopaedic subspecialties of pediatrics and sports medicine.

Longitudinal Predictors of PROMIS Satisfaction With Social Roles and Activities After Shoulder and Knee Sports Orthopaedic Surgery in United States Military Servicemembers: An Observational Study

Background

Satisfaction with social roles and activities is an important outcome for postsurgical rehabilitation and quality of life but not commonly assessed.

Purpose

To evaluate longitudinal patterns of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Satisfaction with Social Roles and Activities measure, including how it relates to other biopsychosocial factors, before and up to 6 months after sports-related orthopaedic surgery.

Study Design

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

Methods

Participants (N = 223) who underwent knee and shoulder sports orthopaedic surgeries between August 2016 and October 2020 completed PROMIS computer-adaptive testing item banks and pain-related measures before surgery and at 6-week, 3-month, and 6-month follow-ups. In a generalized additive mixed model, covariates included time point; peripheral nerve block; the PROMIS Anxiety, Sleep Disturbance, and Pain Behavior measures; and previous 24-hour pain intensity. Patient-reported outcomes were modeled as nonlinear (smoothed) effects.

Results

The linear (estimate, 2.06; 95% CI, 0.77-3.35; P = .002) and quadratic (estimate, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.78-4.08; P < .001) effects of time, as well the nonlinear effects of PROMIS Anxiety (P < .001), PROMIS Sleep Disturbance (P < .001), PROMIS Pain Behavior (P < .001), and pain intensity (P = .02), were significantly associated with PROMIS Satisfaction with Social Roles and Activities. The cubic effect of time (P = .06) and peripheral nerve block (P = .28) were not. The proportion of patients with a 0.5-SD improvement in the primary outcome increased from 23% at 6 weeks to 52% by 6 months postsurgery, whereas those reporting worsening PROMIS Satisfaction with Social Roles and Activities decreased from 30% at 6 weeks to 13% at 6 months.

Conclusion

The PROMIS Satisfaction with Social Roles and Activities measure was found to be related to additional domains of function (eg, mental health, behavioral, pain) associated with postsurgical rehabilitation.

The current utilization of the patient-reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) in isolated or combined total knee arthroplasty populations

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential for clinical research and patient-centric care because they allow us to capture patient perspectives on their health condition. In knee arthroplasty, PROMs are frequently used to assess the risks and benefits of new interventions, surgical approaches, and other management strategies. A few examples of PROMs used in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) include the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) (collectively referred to as "legacy" PROMs). More recently, attention has been brought to another PROM called the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). PROMIS was developed by the National Institute of Health (NIH) and has over 300 domains assessing various aspects of patient health, including pain, physical function, and mental health. With the use of PROMIS increasing in TKA literature, there is a need to review the advancements being made in understanding and applying PROMIS for this population. Thus, the purpose of this study is to provide insight on the utilization, advantages, and disadvantages of PROMIS within the field of knee arthroplasty and to provide a comparison to legacy PROMs.

Can a linking crosswalk table be applied to a different population? An independent validation study for a crosswalk between BSI depression and PROMIS depression scales

A linking procedure establishes a "bridge" between the scores from different patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments that measure similar constructs. After developing a linking relationship however, it is critical to evaluate whether this relationship can be generalized to different groups. Our study aims to validate a published crosswalk for score conversion between the Brief Symptom Inventory Depression subscale and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Depression 8a using an independent sample. Data were from a sample of young men who have sex with men (MSM), which differs in terms of participant age, race, and ethnicity from the sample used to develop the existing crosswalk. The validity of the newly derived crosswalk was evaluated in terms of the correlation, mean difference and standard deviation between the observed and the linked scores. The two crosswalks were further compared to evaluate if the difference was within an acceptable range. More than half of the item parameters obtained from the two samples were found to overlap in their confidence intervals. Differences between each pair of scores in the two crosswalks was within three T-score points, well within the range of each crosswalk score's standard error. This study concludes that an existing crosswalk is replicable on a sample that differs from that used for crosswalk development, but future research should continue to examine the generalizability of the linked parameters and evaluate the reproducibility of this crosswalk to other populations.