Reporting and utilization of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) measures in orthopedic research and practice: a systematic review.

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2020-11-23

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Repository Usage Stats

67
views
25
downloads

Citation Stats

Abstract

BACKGROUND:The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information SystemⓇ (PROMISⓇ) is a dynamic system of psychometrically sound patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. There has been a recent increase in the use of PROMIS measures, yet little has been written about the reporting of these measures in the field of orthopedics. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review to determine the uptake of PROMIS measures across orthopedics and to identify the type of PROMIS measures and domains that are most commonly used in orthopedic research and practice. METHODS:We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus using keywords and database-specific subject headings to capture orthopedic studies reporting PROMIS measures through November 2018. Our inclusion criteria were use of PROMIS measures as an outcome or used to describe a population of patients in an orthopedic setting in patients ≥ 18 years of age. We excluded non-quantitative studies, reviews, and case reports. RESULTS:Our final search yielded 88 studies published from 2013 through 2018, with 57% (50 studies) published in 2018 alone. By body region, 28% (25 studies) reported PROMIS measures in the upper extremity (shoulder, elbow, hand), 36% (32 studies) reported PROMIS measures in the lower extremity (hip, knee, ankle, foot), 19% (17 studies) reported PROMIS measures in the spine, 10% (9 studies) reported PROMIS measures in trauma patients, and 6% (5 studies) reported PROMIS measures in general orthopedic patients. The majority of studies reported between one and three PROMIS domains (82%, 73 studies). The PROMIS Computerized Adaptive Test (CAT) approach was most commonly used (81%, 72 studies). The most frequently reported PROMIS domains were physical function (81%, 71 studies) and pain interference (61%, 54 studies). CONCLUSION:Our review found an increase in the reporting of PROMIS measures over the recent years. Utilization of PROMIS measures in orthopedic populations is clinically appropriate and can facilitate communication of outcomes across different provider types and with reduced respondent burden. REGISTRATION:The protocol for this systematic review was designed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and is registered with the PROSPERO database (CRD42018088260).

Department

Description

Provenance

Citation

Published Version (Please cite this version)

10.1186/s13018-020-02068-9

Publication Info

Horn, Maggie E, Emily K Reinke, Logan J Couce, Bryce B Reeve, Leila Ledbetter and Steven Z George (2020). Reporting and utilization of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) measures in orthopedic research and practice: a systematic review. Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 15(1). p. 553. 10.1186/s13018-020-02068-9 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/21789.

This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.

Scholars@Duke

Horn

Maggie Elizabeth Horn

Assistant Professor in Orthopaedic Surgery
Reinke

Emily Reinke

Research Program Leader, Sr

Dr. Reinke is the Senior Research Program Leader in Sports Medicine. She manages the divisional portfolio and research staff. While supporting the industry sponsored studies, her focus is on PI-initiated research of all areas of interest where she assists as needed with study design, protocol logistics, database design, EMR data extraction, analysis, project presentation, and grant preparation. Her personal expertise is in ACL research, as she has been a member of the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) knee group since 2007.


Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.