Upper-Extremity and Mobility Subdomains From the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Adult Physical Functioning Item Bank

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Ron D. Hays ; PhD^a ; ^b ; ^{drhays@ucla.edu" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} ; Karen L. Spritzer ; BS^a ; Dagmar Amtmann ; PhD^c ; Jin-Shei Lai ; PhD^d ; Esi Morgan DeWitt ; MD^e ; Nan Rothrock ; PhD^d ; Darren A. DeWalt ; MD^f ; William T. Riley ; PhD^g ; James F. Fries ; MD^h ; Eswar Krishnan ; MD^h
• 关键词：Lower extremity ; Psychometrics ; Rehabilitation ; Upper extremity
• 刊名：Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：November 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：94
• 期：11
• 页码：2291-2296
• 全文大小：140 K

文摘

To create upper-extremity and mobility subdomain scores from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical functioning adult item bank.

Design

Expert reviews were used to identify upper-extremity and mobility items from the PROMIS item bank. Psychometric analyses were conducted to assess empirical support for scoring upper-extremity and mobility subdomains.

Setting

Data were collected from the U.S. general population and multiple disease groups via self-administered surveys.

Participants

The sample (N=21,773) included 21,133 English-speaking adults who participated in the PROMIS wave 1 data collection and 640 Spanish-speaking Latino adults recruited separately.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

We used English- and Spanish-language data and existing PROMIS item parameters for the physical functioning item bank to estimate upper-extremity and mobility scores. In addition, we fit graded response models to calibrate the upper-extremity items and mobility items separately, compare separate to combined calibrations, and produce subdomain scores.

Results

After eliminating items because of local dependency, 16 items remained to assess upper extremity and 17 items to assess mobility. The estimated correlation between upper extremity and mobility was .59 using existing PROMIS physical functioning item parameters (r=.60 using parameters calibrated separately for upper-extremity and mobility items).

Conclusions

Upper-extremity and mobility subdomains shared about 35% of the variance in common, and produced comparable scores whether calibrated separately or together. The identification of the subset of items tapping these 2 aspects of physical functioning and scored using the existing PROMIS parameters provides the option of scoring these subdomains in addition to the overall physical functioning score.