Performance of PROMIS Global-10 compared with legacy instruments in patients with shoulder arthritis.
Academic Article
Overview
abstract
BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global-10 measures physical and mental health and provides an estimated EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) score. The purpose of this study was to determine the correlation between the PROMIS Global-10 and several gold-standard legacy measures to validate its overall performance and usefulness in patients with shoulder arthritis. METHODS: The study prospectively enrolled 161 patients with shoulder arthritis before treatment. Each patient completed the PROMIS, EQ-5D, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Assessment Form, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) Index. Spearman correlations were calculated, and Bland-Altman agreement tests were conducted between estimated EQ-5D scores from the PROMIS and actual EQ-5D scores. Ceiling and floor effects were determined. RESULTS: Correlation between the PROMIS and EQ-5D was excellent (0.72, P < .001). However, agreement for estimated EQ-5D ranged from 0.37 below to 0.36 above actual EQ-5D scores. Correlation of the PROMIS physical score was good with the ASES score (0.57, P < .001) and poor with the SANE score (0.23, P = .0045) and WOOS score (0.11, P = .3743). Correlation of the PROMIS mental score was poor when compared with all patient-reported outcome instruments investigated (ASES score, 0.26 [P = .0012]; SANE score, 0.13 [P = .1004]; and WOOS score, 0.09 [P = .4311]). No floor or ceiling effects were observed. CONCLUSION: PROMIS Global-10 physical scores show excellent correlation with the EQ-5D. However, the PROMIS Global-10 cannot replace actual EQ-5D scores for cost-effectiveness assessment in this population because of the large variance in agreement between actual and PROMIS Global-10-estimated EQ-5D scores. PROMIS Global-10 physical scores showed good correlation with the ASES score but poor correlation with other gold-standard patient-reported outcome instruments, suggesting that it is an inappropriate instrument for outcome measurement in populations with shoulder arthritis.
