PROMIS Versus Legacy Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Patients Undergoing Surgical Treatment for Symptomatic Acetabular Dysplasia

Abstract

Background:

No previous study has investigated how the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) performs compared with legacy patient-reported outcome measures in patients with symptomatic acetabular dysplasia treated with periacetabular osteotomy (PAO).

Purpose:

To (1) measure the strength of correlation between the PROMIS and legacy outcome measures and (2) assess floor and ceiling effects of the PROMIS and legacy outcome measures in patients treated with PAO for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia.

Study Design:

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

Methods:

This study included 220 patients who underwent PAO for the treatment of symptomatic acetabular dysplasia. Outcome measures included the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) pain, HOOS activities of daily living (ADL), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), PROMIS pain, and PROMIS physical function subsets, with scores collected preoperatively and/or postoperatively at a minimum 12-month follow-up. The change in mean scores from preoperatively to postoperatively was calculated only in a subgroup of 57 patients with scores at both time points. Distributions of the PROMIS and legacy scores were compared to evaluate floor and ceiling effects, and Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate agreement.

Results:

The mean age at the time of surgery was 27.7 years, and 83.6% were female. The mean follow-up time was 1.5 years. Preoperatively, neither the PROMIS nor the legacy measures showed significant floor or ceiling effects. Postoperatively, all legacy measures showed significant ceiling effects, with 15% of patients with a maximum HOOS pain score of 100, 29% with a HOOS ADL score of 100, and 21% with an mHHS score of 100. The PROMIS and legacy instruments showed good agreement preoperatively and postoperatively. The PROMIS pain had a moderate to strong negative correlation with the HOOS pain (r = −0.66; P < .0001) and mHHS (r = −0.60; P < .0001) preoperatively and the HOOS pain (r = −0.64; P < .0001) and mHHS (r = −0.64; P < .0001) postoperatively. The PROMIS physical function had a moderate positive correlation with the HOOS ADL (r = 0.51; P < .0001) and mHHS (r = 0.49; P < .0001) preoperatively and a stronger correlation postoperatively with the HOOS ADL (r = 0.56; P < .0001) and mHHS (r = 0.56; P < .0001).

Conclusion:

We found good agreement between PROMIS and legacy scores preoperatively and postoperatively. PROMIS scores were largely normally distributed, demonstrating an expanded ability to capture variability in patients with improved outcomes after treatment.

Keywords

PROMIS legacy acetabular dysplasia periacetabular osteotomy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Amstutz

Thomas

Jinnah

Kim

Grogan

Yale

. Treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the hip: a comparison of total joint and surface replacement arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66(2):228-241.

Amtmann

Kim

Chung

Askew

Park

Cook

. Minimally important differences for Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pain interference for individuals with back pain. J Pain Res. 2016;9:251-255.

Banaszkiewicz

. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. In: Banaszkiewicz

Kader

DF, eds

. Classic Papers in Orthopaedics. London: Springer; 2014:13-17.

Beckmann

Hung

Voss

Crum

Bounsanga

Tyser

. Evaluation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System upper extremity computer adaptive test. J Hand Surg Am. 2016;41(7):739-744.e4.

Bellamy

Buchanan

Goldsmith

Campbell

Stitt

. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988;15(12):1833-1840.

Broderick

Schneider

Junghaenel

Schwartz

Stone

. Validity and reliability of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System instruments in osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013;65(10):1625-1633.

Cella

Riley

Stone

, et al. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(11):1179-1194.

Cella

Yount

Rothrock

, et al. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): progress of an NIH Roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Med Care. 2007;45(5)(suppl 1):S3-S11.

Chen

Papuga

Nicandri

Miller

Voloshin

. Preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores predict postoperative outcome in total shoulder arthroplasty patients. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2019;28(3):547-554.

10.

Clohisy

Ackerman

Baca

, et al. Patient-reported outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy from the prospective ANCHOR cohort study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99(1):33-41.

11.

d’Aubigné

Postel

. The classic: functional results of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:7-27.

12.

Fries

Bruce

Cella

. The promise of PROMIS: using item response theory to improve assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2005;23(5)(suppl 39):S53-S57.

13.

Fries

Krishnan

Rose

Lingala

Bruce

. Improved responsiveness and reduced sample size requirements of PROMIS physical function scales with item response theory. Arthritis Res Ther. 2011;13(5):R147.

14.

Fries

Witter

Rose

Cella

Khanna

Morgan-DeWitt

. Item response theory, computerized adaptive testing, and PROMIS: assessment of physical function. J Rheumatol. 2014;41(1):153-158.

15.

Gala

Clohisy

Beaule

. Hip dysplasia in the young adult. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98(1):63-73.

16.

Gandek

Roos

Franklin

Ware

Jr.

A 12-item short form of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS-12): tests of reliability, validity and responsiveness. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2019;27(5):762-770.

17.

Ganz

Klaue

Vinh

Mast

. A new periacetabular osteotomy for the treatment of hip dysplasias: technique and preliminary results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988;232:26-36.

18.

Hoeksma

Van Den Ende

Ronday

Heering

Breedveld

. Comparison of the responsiveness of the Harris Hip Score with generic measures for hip function in osteoarthritis of the hip. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62(10):935-938.

19.

Hung

Bounsanga

Voss

Saltzman

. Establishing minimum clinically important difference values for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function, Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for joint reconstruction, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for joint reconstruction in orthopaedics. World J Orthop. 2018;9(3):41-49.

20.

Hung

Clegg

Greene

Saltzman

. Evaluation of the PROMIS physical function item bank in orthopaedic patients. J Orthop Res. 2011;29(6):947-953.

21.

Hung

Saltzman

Kendall

, et al. What are the MCIDs for PROMIS, NDI, and ODI instruments among patients with spinal conditions? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476(10):2027-2036.

22.

Jacobs

Peabody

Duncan

, et al. Development of the HOOS global to assess patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing hip preservation procedures. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(4):940-946.

23.

Klassbo

Larsson

Mannevik

. Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score: an extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol. 2003;32(1):46-51.

24.

Kollmorgen

Hutyra

Green

Lewis

Olson

Mather

3rd . Relationship between PROMIS computer adaptive tests and legacy hip measures among patients presenting to a tertiary care hip preservation center. Am J Sports Med. 2019;47(4):876-884.

25.

Lukenchuk

Sims

Shin

. Variability in outcome reporting for operatively managed anterior glenohumeral instability: a systematic review. Arthroscopy. 2017;33(2):477-483.

26.

Mahomed

Arndt

McGrory

Harris

. The Harris Hip Score: comparison of patient self-report with surgeon assessment. J Arthroplasty. 2001;16(5):575-580.

27.

Makhni

Meadows

Hamamoto

Higgins

Romeo

Verma

. Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in the upper extremity: the future of outcomes reporting? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2017;26(2):352-357.

28.

Makhni

Padaki

Petridis

, et al. High variability in outcome reporting patterns in high-impact ACL literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(18):1529-1542.

29.

Mohtadi

Griffin

Pedersen

, et al. The development and validation of a self-administered quality-of-life outcome measure for young, active patients with symptomatic hip disease: the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33). Arthroscopy. 2012;28(5):595-605.

30.

Mukaka

. Statistics corner: a guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research. Malawi Med J. 2012;24(3):69-71.

31.

Nilsdotter

Bremander

. Measures of hip function and symptoms: Harris Hip Score (HHS), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Lequesne Index of Severity for Osteoarthritis of the Hip (LISOH), and American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) Hip and Knee Questionnaire. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(suppl 11):S200-S207.

32.

Nilsdotter

Lohmander

Klassbo

Roos

. Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS): validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003;4:10.

33.

Ornetti

Parratte

Gossec

, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the French version of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) in hip osteoarthritis patients. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2010;18(4):522-529.

34.

Padilla

Rudy

Gabor

, et al. Relationship between the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System and traditional patient-reported outcomes for osteoarthritis. J Arthroplasty. 2019;34(2):265-272.

35.

Rampazo-Lacativa

Santos

Coimbra

D’Elboux

. WOMAC and SF-36: instruments for evaluating the health-related quality of life of elderly people with total hip arthroplasty. A descriptive study. Sao Paulo Med J. 2015;133(4):290-297.

36.

Squitieri

Bozic

Pusic

. The role of patient-reported outcome measures in value-based payment reform. Value Health. 2017;20(6):834-836.

37.

Steppacher

Tannast

Ganz

Siebenrock

. Mean 20-year followup of Bernese periacetabular osteotomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:1633-1644.

38.

Stone

Jacobs

Luo

, et al. High degree of variability in reporting of clinical and patient-reported outcomes after hip arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(12):3040-3046.

39.

Terwee

Bot

de Boer

, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34-42.

40.

Thorborg

Holmich

Christensen

Petersen

Roos

. The Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS): development and validation according to the COSMIN checklist. Br J Sports Med. 2011;45(6):478-491.

41.

Wamper

Sierevelt

Poolman

Bhandari

Haverkamp

. The Harris Hip Score: do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics? Acta Orthop. 2010;81(6):703-707.

42.

Ware

. The SF-12v2™: How to Score Version 2 of the SF-12® Health Survey (With a Supplement Documenting Version 1). Lincoln, Rhode Island: Quality Metric; 2002.

43.

Wasko

Yanik

Pascual-Garrido

Clohisy

. Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for periacetabular osteotomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019;101(6):e21.

44.

Wells

Millis

Kim

Bulat

Miller

Matheney

. Survivorship of the Bernese periacetabular osteotomy: what factors are associated with long-term failure? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(2):396-405.

45.

Wells

Schoenecker

Duncan

Goss

Thomason

Clohisy

. Intermediate-term hip survivorship and patient-reported outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy: the Washington University experience. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100(3):218-225.

46.

Yeung

Khan

Schreiber

, et al. Global discrepancies in the diagnosis, surgical management, and investigation of femoroacetabular impingement. Arthroscopy. 2014;30(12):1625-1633.