Editor's choice| Volume 44, ISSUE 4, P267-273, April 2019

Download started.


Evaluation of Version 2.0 of the PROMIS Upper Extremity Computer Adaptive Test in Nonshoulder Upper Extremity Patients

Published:February 25, 2019DOI:


      The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity Computer Adaptive Test (UE CAT) was recently updated to version 2.0 (v2.0). We hypothesized that the PROMIS UE CAT v2.0 would exhibit improved performance characteristics compared with the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) when administered to a nonshoulder upper extremity patient population.


      The UE CAT v2.0, Physical Function (PF) CAT v2.0, and the QuickDASH were each prospectively administered via tablet computer to all patients presenting to a tertiary hand and upper extremity clinic between April 2017 and October 2017. Patient responses were analyzed, and the mean, range, floor and ceiling effect, and correlations between instruments were calculated.


      Among 825 patients, the mean UE CAT v2.0 score was 38.3 (SD 10.7) with a range of 15 to 61 and interquartile range of 15.4. The UE CAT v2.0 had a strong correlation with the QuickDASH (r = –0.749) and the PF CAT v2.0 (r = 0.719). No patient scored between 56 and 60, indicating a gap in scoring in that range. The UE CAT v2.0 demonstrated a floor effect of 1%, a ceiling effect of 6.9%, and a high internal consistency with a Cronbach alpha of 0.99.


      The PROMIS UE CAT v2.0 demonstrated improved ceiling effects, range, and a decreased gap in scoring compared with prior versions. Limitations of the PROMIS UE CAT v2.0 are still present, but updates have led to an incremental improvement over prior versions, demonstrating the ability to influence PROMIS instrument performance through upgrades.

      Clinical relevance

      The updated PROMIS UE CAT v2.0 still demonstrates a ceiling effect and gap in scores at the upper end of the instrument, both of which may limit discrimination between different levels of upper extremity function for high-functioning patients.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Hand Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Smith M.V.
        • Calfee R.P.
        • Baumgarten K.M.
        • Brophy R.H.
        • Wright R.W.
        Upper extremity–specific measures of disability and outcomes in orthopaedic surgery.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012; 94: 277-285
        • Hoang-Kim A.
        • Pegreffi F.
        • Moroni A.
        • Ladd A.
        Measuring wrist and hand function: common scales and checklists.
        Injury. 2011; 42: 253-258
        • Alderman A.K.
        • Chung K.C.
        Measuring outcomes in hand surgery.
        Clin Plast Surg. 2008; 35: 239-250
        • Chung K.C.
        • Burns P.B.
        • Sears E.D.
        Outcomes research in hand surgery: where have we been and where should we go?.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2006; 31: 1373-1379
        • Cella D.
        • Yount S.
        • Rothrock N.
        • et al.
        The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): progress of an NIH Roadmap cooperative group during its first two years.
        Med Care. 2007; 45: S3-S11
        • St. John M.J.
        • Mitten D.
        • Hammert W.C.
        Efficacy of PROMIS Pain Interference and Likert pain scores to assess physical function.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2017; 42: 705-710
        • Beleckas C.M.
        • Padovano A.
        • Guattery J.
        • Chamberlain A.M.
        • Keener J.D.
        • Calfee R.P.
        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; 42: 867-874
        • Kazmers N.H.
        • Hung M.
        • Rane A.A.
        • Bounsanga J.
        • Weng C.
        • Tyser A.R.
        Association of physical function, anxiety, and pain interference in nonshoulder upper extremity patients using the PROMIS platform.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2017; 42: 781-787
        • Hung M.
        • Voss M.W.
        • Bounsanga J.
        • Crum A.B.
        • Tyser A.R.
        Examination of the PROMIS Upper Extremity item bank.
        J Hand Ther. 2017; 30: 485-490
        • Anthony C.A.
        • Glass N.A.
        • Hancock K.
        • Bollier M.
        • Wolf B.R.
        • Hettrich C.M.
        Performance of PROMIS instruments in patients with shoulder instability.
        Am J Sports Med. 2017; 45: 449-453
        • Beckmann J.T.
        • Hung M.
        • Bounsanga J.
        • Wylie J.D.
        • Granger E.K.
        • Tashjian R.Z.
        Psychometric evaluation of the PROMIS Physical Function Computerized Adaptive Test in comparison to the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and Simple Shoulder Test in patients with rotator cuff disease.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015; 24: 1961-1967
        • Overbeek C.L.
        • Nota S.P.
        • Jayakumar P.
        • Hageman M.G.
        • Ring D.
        The PROMIS Physical Function correlates with the QuickDASH in patients with upper extremity illness.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473: 311-317
        • Doring A.C.
        • Nota S.P.
        • Hageman M.G.
        • Ring D.C.
        Measurement of upper extremity disability using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2014; 39: 1160-1165
        • Beckmann J.T.
        • Hung M.
        • Voss M.W.
        • Crum A.B.
        • Bounsanga J.
        • Tyser A.R.
        Evaluation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Computer Adaptive Test.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2016; 41: 739-744.e4
        • Hung M.
        • Saltzman C.L.
        • Greene T.
        • et al.
        The responsiveness of the PROMIS instruments and the qDASH in an upper extremity population.
        J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2017; 1: 12
        • Hung M.
        • Clegg D.O.
        • Greene T.
        • Saltzman C.L.
        Evaluation of the PROMIS physical function item bank in orthopaedic patients.
        J Orthop Res. 2011; 29: 947-953
        • Northwestern University
        HealthMeasures: Transforming how health is measured.
        (Available at:)
        Date accessed: July 6, 2018
        • Beaton D.E.
        • Wright J.G.
        • Katz J.N.
        Upper Extremity Collaborative Group. Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87: 1038-1046
        • Gummesson C.
        • Ward M.M.
        • Atroshi I.
        The shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire (QuickDASH): validity and reliability based on responses within the full-length DASH.
        BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006; 7: 44