Editor's ChoiceThe Minimal Clinically Important Difference of the PROMIS and QuickDASH Instruments in a Nonshoulder Hand and Upper Extremity Patient Population
Section snippets
Data collection
Institutional review board approval was obtained prior to the start of data collection. Patients seeking care at a university orthopedic clinic for nonshoulder hand and upper extremity conditions were prospectively asked to complete demographic and physical function questionnaires on hand-held tablet computers prior to seeing 1 of 4 fellowship-trained orthopedic hand surgeons. All patients were aged 18 years or older and sought care for their baseline visit between January 2015 and August 2017.
Results
A total of 847 patients were included in the study. Average age was 45.4 ± 18 years, and 420 (50%) were male and 427 (50%) were female. For patients who completed at least 1 of the 3 instruments assessing function (UE CAT, PF CAT, QuickDASH), comparisons in baseline patient characteristics between groups reporting no change and slightly improved are shown in Table 1. There were no significant differences in basic demographic factors between groups reporting no change and slightly improved on
Discussion
As patient-reported outcome measures are integrated into clinical care,18 the interpretability of scores becomes increasingly important. The use of PROMIS instruments can make important contributions to clinical practice,19 but it is important to understand how patients perceive changes in scores. The present study expands the evaluation of MCIDs for the PROMIS UE CAT and PROMIS PF CAT to a nonshoulder hand and upper extremity patient population.
Our MCID estimate for the PROMIS UE CAT was 2.1.
Acknowledgments
This investigation was supported by the University of Utah Study Design and Biostatistics Center, with funding in part from the National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through Grant UL1TR002538.
References (33)
- et al.
Evaluation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Computer Adaptive Test
J Hand Surg Am
(2016) - et al.
Performance of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity (UE) versus Physical Function (PF) Computer Adaptive Tests (CATs) in upper extremity clinics
J Hand Surg Am
(2017) - et al.
Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference
Control Clin Trials
(1989) - et al.
Minimal clinically important differences for PROMIS Physical Function, Upper Extremity, and Pain Interference in carpal tunnel release using region- and condition-specific PROM tools
J Hand Surg Am
(2019) - et al.
Minimal clinically important difference after carpal tunnel release using the PROMIS platform
J Hand Surg Am
(2019) - et al.
Minimal clinically important difference for PROMIS Physical Function in patients with distal radius fractures
J Hand Surg Am
(2019) - et al.
The PROMIS Physical Function item bank was calibrated to a standardized metric and shown to improve measurement efficiency
J Clin Epidemiol
(2014) - et al.
Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes
J Clin Epidemiol
(2008) - et al.
The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008
J Clin Epidemiol
(2010) - et al.
Minimally important differences were estimated for six Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System—cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients
J Clin Epidemiol
(2011)
Minimal clinically important differences of 3 patient-rated outcomes instruments
J Hand Surg Am
Psychometric properties of the shortened Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH) and numeric pain rating scale in patients with shoulder pain
J Shoulder Elbow Surg
Responsiveness, minimal importance difference and minimal detectable change scores of the shortened Disability Arm Shoulder Hand (QuickDASH) questionnaire
Man Ther
A combination of distribution- and anchor-based approaches determined minimally important differences (MIDs) for four endpoints in a breast cancer scale
J Clin Epidemiol
Minimal change is sensitive, less specific to recovery: a diagnostic testing approach to interpretability
J Clin Epidemiol
Mind the MIC:large variation among populations and methods
J Clin Epidemiol
Cited by (67)
A Pilot Feasibility Trial of an Upper Extremity Assistive System
2023, Archives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation
No benefits in any form have been received or will be received related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.