Background: Recent studies of patients with rotator cuff tears have demonstrated improved efficiency with Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) when compared with traditional patient-reported outcome measures (PROM). However, these studies have been cross-sectional in nature and the responsiveness of PROMIS computer adaptive test (CAT) forms has not been evaluated. The purpose of this study was to determine the responsiveness of PROMIS CAT assessments in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.
Methods: All patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair by one of 3 fellowship-trained surgeons were included in the study. PROMIS CAT upper extremity physical function ("PROMIS-UE"), pain interference ("PROMIS-PI"), and depression ("PROMIS-D") scores from preoperative and 6-month postoperative visits were collected and analyzed. Patient-centric demographic factors, tear size, and biceps involvement were also correlated to preoperative and postoperative PROMIS scores.
Results: A total of 101 patients were enrolled in the study. The average age was 59.8 ± 8.9 years with 51 males (50.5%). Preoperative PROMIS-UE, PROMIS-PI, and PROMIS-D CAT scores improved significantly from 29.8 ± 6.0, 62.6 ± 5.1, and 48.4 ± 8.7, respectively, to 40.9 ± 9.8, 51.2 ± 9.3, and 42.9 ± 9.0, respectively, at 6-month follow-up (P < .001). Preoperative correlations were found between PROMIS-UE and PROMIS-PI scores (P < .001) and between PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-D scores (P = .001). No significant correlation was found between PROMIS-UE and PROMIS-D scores (P = .08), preoperatively. Preoperative PROMIS-UE, PROMIS-PI, or PROMIS-D scores were not correlated with rotator cuff tear size (P = .4).
Conclusion: PROMIS CAT forms demonstrate responsiveness in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair across numerous domains.
Keywords: Arthroscopy; depression; function; injury; pain; rotator cuff; shoulder; surgery.
Copyright © 2019 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.