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

Horn, Maggie E

Reinke, Emily K

Couce, Logan J

Reeve, Bryce B

Ledbetter, Leila

George, Steven Z

2020-12-01T21:10:00Z

2020-12-01T21:10:00Z

2020-11-23

2020-12-01T21:09:59Z

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).

10.1186/s13018-020-02068-9

1749-799X

1749-799X

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/21789

eng

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research

10.1186/s13018-020-02068-9

Orthopedics

PROMIS

Pain

Patient-reported outcome measures

Physical function

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

Journal article

Horn, Maggie E|0000-0002-3963-7389

Reinke, Emily K|0000-0001-7629-8067

Reeve, Bryce B|0000-0002-6709-8714

Ledbetter, Leila|0000-0002-5206-8002

George, Steven Z|0000-0003-4988-9421

553

1

School of Medicine

Duke Clinical Research Institute

Orthopaedics

Duke

Institutes and Centers

Clinical Science Departments

Population Health Sciences

Orthopaedics, Physical Therapy

Basic Science Departments

Published

15