Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System and Legacy Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in the Field of Orthopaedics: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE

To compare Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) with legacy patient-reported outcome measures with regard to correlations, ease of use, and quality criteria for orthopaedic conditions.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE database was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify published articles that referenced the various PROMIS PF measures. Three authors independently reviewed selected studies. The search returned 130 studies, 44 of which underwent review. Of these, 18 were selected for inclusion. A general linear model and paired t-tests were used to assess for differences between legacy patient-reported outcome measures and PROMIS.

RESULTS

The combined sample size of all articles yielded 3,047 total patients. Overall, PROMIS PF measures and legacy scores showed strong correlations (range: 0.59-0.83) when evaluating upper extremity, lower extremity, and spine patients. PROMIS questionnaires (6.04, standard error [SE] = 0.7) have significantly fewer questions than legacy forms (24.27, SE = 4.36). In lower extremity studies, the PROMIS PF (100.14 seconds, SE = 28.41) forms were completed in significantly less time (P = .03) than legacy forms (243.70 seconds, SE = 45.8). No significant difference was found between the reliabilities of the 2 types of measures.

CONCLUSIONS

PROMIS PF scores correlate strongly, particularly in lower extremity patients, with some of the most commonly used legacy measures in orthopaedics. PROMIS can be administered quicker and applied to a broader patient population while remaining highly reliable.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV evidence.