Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function instruments compare favorably to legacy patient reported outcome measures in spine patients: a systematic review of the literature
Ziedas A, Abed V, Bench C, Rahman T, and Makhni MC. PROMIS Physical Function Instruments Compare Favorably to Legacy Patient Reported Outcome Measures in Spine Patients: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Spine J 2021.
The spine journal
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Preliminary evidence has suggested favorable correlation between National Institutes of Health (NIH) Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) assessments and traditional ("legacy") patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in spine surgery. There has been a significant increase in PROMIS research with regards to spinal conditions.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review is to provide an assessment of PROMIS Physical Function (PF) measures in this patient population.
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Systematic review.
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 to identify published articles that referenced the various PROMIS PF measures. Two authors independently reviewed selected studies. The search returned 1,060 studies, 124 of which were selected for independent review by two authors. Of these, 37 were selected for inclusion. Mixed linear models were performed to assess for differences between legacy PROMs and PROMIS measures.
RESULTS: The combined sample size of all included studies yielded 10,296 total patients. Overall, PROMIS Physical Function (PF) measures demonstrated strong correlations with legacy PROMs when evaluating spine patients (weighted Pearson correlation, 0.589, standard error [SE] = 0.023; weighted Spearman correlation, 0.702, SE = 0.028). PROMIS questionnaires had significantly fewer questions than did legacy PROMs (4.2 ± 0.30 vs 9.53 ± 0.82, P = 0.015). In spine studies, the PROMIS PF forms were completed in significantly less time than legacy PROMs (48.1 ± 2.9 vs 174.7 ± 12.6 seconds, P < 0.001). The differences for the reliability measures and the floor and ceiling effects were not significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System PF forms compare favorably with legacy PROMs with regard to correlations, ease of use, and quality criteria in the field of spine surgery. PROMIS PF scores correlate strongly with commonly used legacy PROMs, particularly in spine patients. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System PF forms can be administered efficiently and to a broad patient population while remaining highly reliable.
ePub ahead of print