Advertisement

Minimal Clinically Important Differences for PROMIS Physical Function, Upper Extremity, and Pain Interference in Carpal Tunnel Release Using Region- and Condition-Specific PROM Tools

      Purpose

      Uncertainty exists about what change in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores represents a clinically relevant improvement (minimal clinically important difference [MCID]) in hand surgery care. Using a region-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) (Michigan Hand Question [MHQ]) and a condition-specific PROM (Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire [BCTQ]), MCID values were determined for PROMIS Physical Function (PF), Upper Extremity (UE), and Pain Interference (PI) computerized adaptive testing among patients undergoing carpal tunnel release (CTR).

      Methods

      Patients undergoing CTR with a single surgeon from November 2014 to April 2017 were asked to complete the BCTQ, MHQ, and PROMIS PF, UE, and PI at each visit. Patients who had completed questionnaires both at a preoperative and either a 6-week or a 3-month postoperative visit were included. The PROMIS PF, UE, and PI MCID values were calculated using previously determined MCID estimates in the literature with both region- (ie, MHQ) and condition-specific (ie, BCTQ) PROM anchors. The PROMIS domain MCID estimates were also determined using the distribution-based method.

      Results

      A total of 70 patients fit our inclusion criteria. Using MHQ Function and Pain, PROMIS UE, PF, and PI MCIDs were 6.3, 1.8, and –8.9, respectively. Using the average of the 2 BCTQ domains, PROMIS UE, PF, and PI MCIDs were 8.0, 2.8, and –9.7, respectively. Using the distribution-based method, PROMIS UE, PF, and PI MCIDs were 4.2, 2.7, and –4.1, respectively.

      Conclusions

      Using region- and condition-specific PROMs, we were able to provide MCID estimates of PROMIS UE, PF, and PI for patients undergoing CTR.

      Clinical relevance

      Estimating PROMIS UE, PF, and PI MCIDs in CTR using validated region- and condition-specific PROMs provides hand surgeons a way to evaluate CTR outcomes not previously described in the literature. Surgeons should understand that these values are only estimates and future work is needed to verify whether they reflect clinical improvement.

      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:

      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

      References

        • Pourmemari M.H.
        • Heliovaara M.
        • Viikari-Juntura E.
        • Shiri R.
        Carpal tunnel release: lifetime prevalence, annual incidence, and risk factors.
        Muscle Nerve. 2018; 58: 497-502
        • Porter M.E.
        What is value in health care?.
        N Engl J Med. 2010; 363: 2477-2481
        • Hand Surgery Quality Consotrium
        Candidate quality measures for hand surgery.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2017; 42: 859-866.e3
        • Baumhauer J.F.
        Patient-reported outcomes—are they living up to their potential?.
        N Engl J Med. 2017; 377: 6-9
        • Bumpass D.B.
        • Samora J.B.
        • Butler C.A.
        • Jevsevar D.S.
        • Moffatt-Bruce S.D.
        • Bozic K.J.
        Orthopaedic quality reporting: a comprehensive review of the current landscape and a roadmap for progress.
        JBJS Rev. 2014; 2: e5
        • Ghomrawi H.M.K.
        • Mancuso C.A.
        • Dunning A.
        • et al.
        Do surgeon expectations predict clinically important improvements in WOMAC scores after THA and TKA?.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017; 475: 2150-2158
        • Riddle D.L.
        • Jensen M.P.
        • Ang D.
        • Slover J.
        • Perera R.
        • Dumenci L.
        Do pain coping and pain beliefs associate with outcome measures before knee arthroplasty in patients who catastrophize about pain? A cross-sectional analysis from a randomized clinical trial.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018; 476: 778-786
        • Noble P.C.
        • Dwyer M.
        • Brekke A.
        Commonalities, differences, and challenges with patient-derived outcome measurement tools: function/activity scales.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471: 3457-3465
        • Ho B.
        • Houck J.R.
        • Flemister A.S.
        • et al.
        Preoperative PROMIS scores predict postoperative success in foot and ankle patients.
        Foot Ankle Int. 2016; 37: 911-918
        • Bernstein D.N.
        • Houck J.R.
        • Gonzalez R.M.
        • et al.
        Preoperative PROMIS scores predict postoperative PROMIS score improvement for patients undergoing hand surgery [published online ahead of print August 3, 2018]. Hand (N Y).
        • 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
        • Giladi A.M.
        • Chung K.C.
        Measuring outcomes in hand surgery.
        Clin Plast Surg. 2013; 40: 313-322
        • Anderson M.R.
        • Houck J.R.
        • Saltzman C.L.
        • et al.
        Validation and generalizability of preoperative PROMIS scores to predict postoperative success in foot and ankle patients.
        Foot Ankle Int. 2018; 39: 763-770
        • Rubery P.T.
        • Houck J.
        • Mesfin A.
        • Molinari R.
        • Papuga M.O.
        Preoperative patient reported outcomes measurement information system scores assist in predicting early postoperative success in lumbar discectomy.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019; 44: 325-333
        • Brodke D.J.
        • Saltzman C.L.
        • Brodke D.S.
        PROMIS for orthopaedic outcomes measurement.
        J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2016; 24: 744-749
        • Bernstein D.N.
        • Houck J.R.
        • Hammert W.C.
        A comparison of PROMIS UE versus PF: correlation to PROMIS PI and depression, ceiling and floor effects, and time to completion [published online ahead of print February 4, 2019]. J Hand Surg Am.
      1. HealthMeasures. PROMIS. 2018; (Available at:)
        • Shauver M.J.
        • Chung K.C.
        The minimal clinically important difference of the Michigan hand outcomes questionnaire.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2009; 34: 509-514
        • Bessette L.
        • Sangha O.
        • Kuntz K.M.
        • et al.
        Comparative responsiveness of generic versus disease-specific and weighted versus unweighted health status measures in carpal tunnel syndrome.
        Med Care. 1998; 36: 491-502
        • Norman G.R.
        • Sloan J.A.
        • Wyrwich K.W.
        Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation.
        Med Care. 2003; 41: 582-592
        • Berliner J.L.
        • Brodke D.J.
        • Chan V.
        • SooHoo N.F.
        • Bozic K.J.
        Can preoperative patient-reported outcome measures be used to predict meaningful improvement in function after TKA?.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017; 475: 149-157
        • Berliner J.L.
        • Brodke D.J.
        • Chan V.
        • SooHoo N.F.
        • Bozic K.J.
        John Charnley Award: preoperative patient-reported outcome measures predict clinically meaningful improvement in function after THA.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016; 474: 321-329
        • Hung M.
        • Baumhauer J.F.
        • Licari F.W.
        • Voss M.W.
        • Bounsanga J.
        • Saltzman C.L.
        PROMIS and FAAM minimal clinically important differences in foot and ankle orthopedics.
        Foot Ankle Int. 2019; 40: 65-73
        • Hung M.
        • Saltzman C.L.
        • Kendall R.
        • et al.
        What are the MCIDs for PROMIS, NDI, and ODI instruments among patients with spinal conditions?.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018; 476: 2027-2036
        • 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
        • Nwachukwu B.U.
        • Chang B.
        • Fields K.
        • et al.
        Defining the “substantial clinical benefit” after arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement.
        Am J Sports Med. 2017; 45: 1297-1303
        • Nwachukwu B.U.
        • Chang B.
        • Rotter B.Z.
        • Kelly B.T.
        • Ranawat A.S.
        • Nawabi D.H.
        Minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after revision hip arthroscopy.
        Arthroscopy. 2018; 34: 1862-1868
        • Pham T.
        • van der Heijde D.
        • Altman R.D.
        • et al.
        OMERACT-OARSI initiative: Osteoarthritis Research Society International set of responder criteria for osteoarthritis clinical trials revisited.
        Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2004; 12: 389-399
        • Amtmann D.
        • Kim J.
        • Chung H.
        • Askew R.L.
        • Park R.
        • Cook K.F.
        Minimally important differences for Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pain interference for individuals with back pain.
        J Pain Res. 2016; 9: 251-255
        • Anderson M.R.
        • Baumhauer J.F.
        • DiGiovanni B.F.
        • et al.
        Determining success or failure after foot and ankle surgery using patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) and patient reported outcome information system (PROMIS).
        Foot Ankle Int. 2018; 39: 894-902
        • Atherton W.G.
        • Faraj A.A.
        • Riddick A.C.
        • Davis T.R.
        Follow-up after carpal tunnel decompression—general practitioner surgery or hand clinic? A randomized prospective study.
        J Hand Surg Br. 1999; 24: 296-297
        • Marti C.
        • Hensler S.
        • Herren D.B.
        • Niedermann K.
        • Marks M.
        Measurement properties of the EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L to assess quality of life in patients undergoing carpal tunnel release.
        J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2016; 41: 957-962
        • Ozer K.
        • Malay S.
        • Toker S.
        • Chung K.C.
        Minimal clinically important difference of carpal tunnel release in diabetic and nondiabetic patients.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013; 131: 1279-1285
        • Bernstein D.N.
        • Mahmood B.
        • Ketonis C.
        • Hammert W.C.
        A comparison of PROMIS physical function and pain interference scores in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome: research collection versus routine clinical collection [published online ahead of print February 28, 2019]. Hand (N Y).