Psychometric Properties and Feasibility of PROMIS Computerized Adaptive Tests Compared with Disease-Specific Measures in Knee Arthroplasty

3Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: – The efficient assessment of health outcomes in knee arthroplasty may benefit from universally applicable Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System computerized adaptive tests (PROMIS CATs), rather than disease-specific measures. This study aimed to evaluate and compare some psychometric properties and the feasibility of various PROMIS CATs (Pain Interference [PROMIS-PI-CAT, v1.1], Physical Function [PROMIS-PF-CAT, v2.0], Mobility [PROMIS-Mob-CAT, v2.0], Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities [PROMIS-AS-CAT, v2.0], and Satisfaction with Social Roles and Activities [PROMIS-SS-CAT, v2.0]), with the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) scales, including the KOOS Physical Function Shortform [KOOS-PS] and KOOS for Joint Replacement [KOOS-JR], and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scales. Methods: – Patients (n = 193; mean age [and standard deviation], 64.4 ± 10.1 years; 56% female; mean body mass index, 29.6 ± 5.2 kg/m2) undergoing unilateral or bilateral primary or revision knee arthroplasty at AZ Alma (Eeklo, Belgium) completed the measures 6 weeks before and 6 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The study evaluated precision (standard error as a percentage of scale range [SE%]), responsiveness (hypothesized correlations and standardized response mean [SRM]), floor and ceiling effects (percentage with the worst and the best scores), and feasibility (completion time and number of items). Results: – The PROMIS-PI-CAT and PROMIS-PF-CAT showed better precision at baseline compared with corresponding KOOS/WOMAC scales (SE%, 4.6 versus 7.1/9.3 and 3.6 versus 4.4/4.4), but less precision at 12 months of follow-up (SE%, 6.8 versus 4.8/5.5 and 3.6 versus 3.0/3.0). All PROMIS CATs had good responsiveness (75% to 100% of hypotheses not rejected; SRMs at 12 months: PROMIS-PI-CAT = −1.35 versus KOOS Pain = 1.78 and WOMAC Pain = −1.59; PROMIS-PF-CAT = 1.14 versus KOOS-ADL/WOMAC-PF = 1.43/−1.44; PROMIS-AS-CAT = 0.93 and PROMIS-SS-CAT = 0.93). The PROMIS-PF-CAT did not show ceiling effects at 12 months, unlike the KOOS-ADL/WOMAC-PF (17.5%). PROMIS CATs were more feasible at baseline and follow-ups compared with KOOS and WOMAC scales. Conclusions: – PROMIS-CATs effectively assess health outcomes in knee arthroplasty patients, showing strong psychometric properties and favorable feasibility, supporting their role in value-based health care. Level of Evidence: – Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dhollander, O., Roorda, L. D., Diarra, S., Ghijselings, I., Demurie, A., Terwee, C. B., … Van den Wyngaert, H. (2025). Psychometric Properties and Feasibility of PROMIS Computerized Adaptive Tests Compared with Disease-Specific Measures in Knee Arthroplasty. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 107(21), 2371–2388. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.24.01348

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free