Robert L Askew1, Karon F Cook2, Dennis A Revicki3, David Cella2, Dagmar Amtmann4. 1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Box 357920, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. 2. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 633 N. St. Clair, Suite 1900, Chicago IL 60611, USA. 3. Outcomes Research, Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD 208147, USA. 4. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Box 357920, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. Electronic address: dagmara@u.washington.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical validity, including responsiveness, of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) pain interference (PROMIS-PI) and pain behavior (PROMIS-PB) T-scores. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Data were aggregated from longitudinal studies of cancer, chronic low back pain (cLBP), rheumatoid arthritis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and major depressive disorder (MDD). Linear mixed-effects models were used to compare baseline score differences and score changes over time. We calculated standardized response means (SRMs) for subgroups defined by self-reported change in general health and pain. RESULTS: A total of 1,357 individuals participated at baseline and 1,225 at follow-up. Hypotheses of significant change in PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-PB scores were supported in the intervention groups (cLBP and MDD). Differences in baseline scores for COPD exacerbators compared to stable COPD patients were in the hypothesized direction but were not statistically significant. Subgroups reporting better health showed corresponding negative SRM values supporting responsiveness of T-scores to improvement. Responsiveness to decrements was supported in some but not all clinical groups and varied by anchor. More congruent values were obtained when using a pain-specific anchor. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence that PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-PB scores are sensitive to changes in pain in studies of interventions expected to impact pain. The results inform estimation of meaningful change and support power analyses for comparative effectiveness research.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical validity, including responsiveness, of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) pain interference (PROMIS-PI) and pain behavior (PROMIS-PB) T-scores. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Data were aggregated from longitudinal studies of cancer, chronic low back pain (cLBP), rheumatoid arthritis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and major depressive disorder (MDD). Linear mixed-effects models were used to compare baseline score differences and score changes over time. We calculated standardized response means (SRMs) for subgroups defined by self-reported change in general health and pain. RESULTS: A total of 1,357 individuals participated at baseline and 1,225 at follow-up. Hypotheses of significant change in PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-PB scores were supported in the intervention groups (cLBP and MDD). Differences in baseline scores for COPD exacerbators compared to stable COPDpatients were in the hypothesized direction but were not statistically significant. Subgroups reporting better health showed corresponding negative SRM values supporting responsiveness of T-scores to improvement. Responsiveness to decrements was supported in some but not all clinical groups and varied by anchor. More congruent values were obtained when using a pain-specific anchor. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence that PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-PB scores are sensitive to changes in pain in studies of interventions expected to impact pain. The results inform estimation of meaningful change and support power analyses for comparative effectiveness research.
Authors: William T Riley; Nan Rothrock; Bonnie Bruce; Christopher Christodolou; Karon Cook; Elizabeth A Hahn; David Cella Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-07-01 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Karon F Cook; Alyssa M Bamer; Dagmar Amtmann; Ivan R Molton; Mark P Jensen Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2012-03-02 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Karon F Cook; Sally E Jensen; Benjamin D Schalet; Jennifer L Beaumont; Dagmar Amtmann; Susan Czajkowski; Darren A Dewalt; James F Fries; Paul A Pilkonis; Bryce B Reeve; Arthur A Stone; Kevin P Weinfurt; David Cella Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2016-03-04 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Dennis A Revicki; Wen-Hung Chen; Neesha Harnam; Karon F Cook; Dagmar Amtmann; Leigh F Callahan; Mark P Jensen; Francis J Keefe Journal: Pain Date: 2009-08-15 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Erin E Krebs; Karl A Lorenz; Matthew J Bair; Teresa M Damush; Jingwei Wu; Jason M Sutherland; Steven M Asch; Kurt Kroenke Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2009-05-06 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Felix Fischer; Chris Gibbons; Joël Coste; Jose M Valderas; Matthias Rose; Alain Leplège Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2018-01-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Richard Kendall; Bill Wagner; Darrel Brodke; Jerry Bounsanga; Maren Voss; Yushan Gu; Ryan Spiker; Brandon Lawrence; Man Hung Journal: Pain Med Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Julie M Fritz; Daniel I Rhon; Deydre S Teyhen; Jacob Kean; Megan E Vanneman; Eric L Garland; Ian E Lee; Richard E Thorp; Tom H Greene Journal: Pain Med Date: 2020-12-12 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Polake Rawang; Prawit Janwantanakul; Helena Correia; Mark P Jensen; Rotsalai Kanlayanaphotporn Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-11-13 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Chen X Chen; Kurt Kroenke; Timothy Stump; Jacob Kean; Erin E Krebs; Matthew J Bair; Teresa Damush; Patrick O Monahan Journal: J Pain Date: 2018-12-06 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: John H Alexander; Sumanas W Jordan; Julie M West; Amy Compston; Jennifer Fugitt; J Byers Bowen; Gregory A Dumanian; Raphael Pollock; Joel L Mayerson; Thomas J Scharschmidt; Ian L Valerio Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2019-06-13 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Thi Xuan Mai Tran; Jungeun Park; Joonki Lee; Yuh-Seog Jung; Yoonjung Chang; Hyunsoon Cho Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-10-15 Impact factor: 3.603