Gregor Liegl1, Matthias Rose1,2, Helena Correia3, H Felix Fischer1,4, Sibel Kanlidere1, Annett Mierke1, Alexander Obbarius1, Sandra Nolte1,5. 1. 1 Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Center for Internal Medicine and Dermatology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 2. 2 Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA. 3. 3 Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA. 4. 4 Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 5. 5 Population Health Strategic Research Centre, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To translate the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) item bank version 1.2 into German and to investigate psychometric properties of resulting full bank and seven derived short forms. DESIGN: Cross-sectional psychometric study. SETTING: Inpatient and outpatient clinics of the Department of Psychosomatic Medicine at Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany. SUBJECTS: A total of 10 adult patients with various chronic diseases participated in cognitive debriefing interviews. The final item bank was administered to n = 266 adult patients with a broad range of medical conditions. INTERVENTIONS: Patient-reported outcome assessment as part of routine care. MAIN MEASURES: PROMIS v1.2 PF bank; MOS SF-36 PF scale (PF-10). RESULTS: Cross-cultural adaptation of the item bank followed established guidelines. For the final German translation, the corrected item-total correlations ranged from 0.44 to 0.84. Cronbach's alpha was high for each PROMIS PF short form ( α = 0.88-0.96). The full PROMIS PF bank and most short forms correlated highly with the SF-36 PF-10 ( r = 0.85-0.90), with the exception of PROMIS Upper Extremity ( r = 0.64). PROMIS Upper Extremity showed ceiling effects and lower agreement with the full bank than other short forms. Unidimensionality was supported for all PROMIS PF measures using traditional factor analysis and nonparametric item response theory. CONCLUSION: The German PROMIS PF bank was found to be conceptually equivalent to the English version and fulfilled the psychometric requirements for use of short forms in clinical practice. Future studies should pay particular attention to samples with upper extremity functional limitations to further investigate the dimensional structure of PF as conceptualized according to PROMIS.
OBJECTIVES: To translate the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) item bank version 1.2 into German and to investigate psychometric properties of resulting full bank and seven derived short forms. DESIGN: Cross-sectional psychometric study. SETTING: Inpatient and outpatient clinics of the Department of Psychosomatic Medicine at Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany. SUBJECTS: A total of 10 adult patients with various chronic diseases participated in cognitive debriefing interviews. The final item bank was administered to n = 266 adult patients with a broad range of medical conditions. INTERVENTIONS:Patient-reported outcome assessment as part of routine care. MAIN MEASURES: PROMIS v1.2 PF bank; MOS SF-36 PF scale (PF-10). RESULTS: Cross-cultural adaptation of the item bank followed established guidelines. For the final German translation, the corrected item-total correlations ranged from 0.44 to 0.84. Cronbach's alpha was high for each PROMIS PF short form ( α = 0.88-0.96). The full PROMIS PF bank and most short forms correlated highly with the SF-36 PF-10 ( r = 0.85-0.90), with the exception of PROMIS Upper Extremity ( r = 0.64). PROMIS Upper Extremity showed ceiling effects and lower agreement with the full bank than other short forms. Unidimensionality was supported for all PROMIS PF measures using traditional factor analysis and nonparametric item response theory. CONCLUSION: The German PROMIS PF bank was found to be conceptually equivalent to the English version and fulfilled the psychometric requirements for use of short forms in clinical practice. Future studies should pay particular attention to samples with upper extremity functional limitations to further investigate the dimensional structure of PF as conceptualized according to PROMIS.
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: V J Zonjee; I L Abma; M J de Mooij; S M van Schaik; R M Van den Berg-Vos; L D Roorda; C B Terwee Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2022-05-27 Impact factor: 3.440
Authors: Johannes Knauer; Yannik Terhorst; Paula Philippi; Selina Kallinger; Sandro Eiler; Reinhold Kilian; Tamara Waldmann; Morten Moshagen; Martina Bader; Harald Baumeister Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-06-23 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Aaron J Kaat; Chester Trip Buckenmaier; Karon F Cook; Nan E Rothrock; Benjamin D Schalet; Richard C Gershon; Mark S Vrahas Journal: J Patient Rep Outcomes Date: 2019-11-26
Authors: Laura Cano-García; Natalia Mena-Vázquez; Sara Manrique-Arija; Rocío Redondo-Rodriguez; Carmen María Romero-Barco; Antonio Fernández-Nebro Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2021-12-02
Authors: Caroline B Terwee; John Devin Peipert; Robert Chapman; Jin-Shei Lai; Berend Terluin; David Cella; Philip Griffith; Lidwine B Mokkink Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-07-10 Impact factor: 4.147