Performance of the PROMIS After Operative Interventions for Shoulder Instability.

backgroundThe Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was developed to capture patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in an efficient manner. Few studies have assessed this instrument postoperatively. PURPOSE: To compare the PROMIS Physical Function computer adaptive test (PROMIS PF CAT) and Upper Extremity (PROMIS UE) item bank to other previously validated PRO instruments and to evaluate ceiling and floor effects and construct validity responsiveness in patients who underwent operative interventions for shoulder instability. STUDY

designCohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

methodsA total of 72 patients who underwent operative interventions for shoulder instability completed the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) assessment form, Marx shoulder activity scale (Marx), 36-Item Short Form Health Survey physical function (SF-36 PF) and general health (SF-36 GH), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), PROMIS PF CAT, and PROMIS UE before surgery and then at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. Correlation coefficients were calculated among these tools. The effect size of change was also calculated for each tool at each time point. A total of 91 patients who had also undergone surgery for shoulder instability completed these PRO instruments 2 years postoperatively. The percentage of patients hitting the ceiling and floor effects of each of the PRO instruments was calculated at all time points.

resultsThe PROMIS PF CAT demonstrated excellent-good correlation with the SF-36 PF at all postoperative time points (0.61 at 6 weeks, 0.68 at 6 months, and 0.64 at 2 years;

conclusionThe PROMIS PF CAT demonstrated good to excellent correlation with other previously validated PRO instruments that assess physical function in patients with shoulder instability postoperatively. The PROMIS UE demonstrated good correlation with other PRO tools but had a significant ceiling effect and is not recommended for this patient population. Both tools demonstrated an ability to detect change after surgical interventions with a good effect size.