Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

Detecting functional change in response to exercise in knee osteoarthritis: a comparison of two computerized adaptive tests

Authors: Feng-Hang Chang, Alan M. Jette, Mary D. Slavin, Kristin Baker, Pengsheng Ni, Julie J. Keysor

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The intent of this study was to examine and compare the ability to detect change of two patient reported outcome (PRO) instruments that use a computerized adaptive test (CAT) approach to measurement. The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Physical Function scale is a generic PRO, while the Osteoarthritis Computerized Adaptive Test (OA-CAT) is an osteoarthritis-specific PRO.

Methods

This descriptive, longitudinal study was conducted in a community setting, involving individuals from the greater Boston area. Inclusion criteria: age > 50, self-reported doctor-diagnosed knee osteoarthritis (OA) and knee pain. The PROMIS® Physical Function CAT and OA-CAT Functional Difficulty scale were administered at baseline and at the conclusion of a 6-week exercise program. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated for both measures, and bootstrap methods were used to construct confidence intervals and to test for significant ES differences between the measures.

Results

The OA-CAT Functional Difficulty scale achieved an ES of 0.62 (0.43, 0.87) compared to the PROMIS® Physical Function CAT ES of 0.42 (0.24, 0.63). ES estimates for the two CAT measures were not statistically different.

Conclusions

The condition-specific OA-CAT and generic PROMIS® Physical Function CAT both demonstrated the ability to detect change in function. While the OA-CAT scale showed larger effect size, no statistically significant difference was found in the effect size estimates for the generic and condition-specific CATs. Both CATs have potential for use in arthritis research.

Trial registration

This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.​gov on 6/21/11 (Identifier NCT01394874)
Literature
1.
go back to reference Veenhof C, Bijlsma JW, van den Ende CH, van Dijk GM, Pisters MF, Dekker J. Psychometric evaluation of osteoarthritis questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;55(3):480–92.CrossRefPubMed Veenhof C, Bijlsma JW, van den Ende CH, van Dijk GM, Pisters MF, Dekker J. Psychometric evaluation of osteoarthritis questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;55(3):480–92.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Rat AC, Coste J, Pouchot J, Baumann M, Spitz E, Retel-Rude N, Le Quintrec JS, Dumont-Fischer D, Guillemin F. OAKHQOL: a new instrument to measure quality of life in knee and hip osteoarthritis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58(1):47–55.CrossRefPubMed Rat AC, Coste J, Pouchot J, Baumann M, Spitz E, Retel-Rude N, Le Quintrec JS, Dumont-Fischer D, Guillemin F. OAKHQOL: a new instrument to measure quality of life in knee and hip osteoarthritis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58(1):47–55.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Bruce B, Fries JF. The Stanford health assessment Questionnaire: a review of its history, issues, progress, and documentation. J Rheumatol. 2003;30(1):167–78.PubMed Bruce B, Fries JF. The Stanford health assessment Questionnaire: a review of its history, issues, progress, and documentation. J Rheumatol. 2003;30(1):167–78.PubMed
4.
go back to reference Fries JF, Spitz P, Kraines RG, Holman HR. Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis & Rheumatism. 1980;23(2):137–45.CrossRef Fries JF, Spitz P, Kraines RG, Holman HR. Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis & Rheumatism. 1980;23(2):137–45.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Ware JE Jr. Conceptualization and measurement of health-related quality of life: comments on an evolving field. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84(4 Suppl 2):S43–51.CrossRefPubMed Ware JE Jr. Conceptualization and measurement of health-related quality of life: comments on an evolving field. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84(4 Suppl 2):S43–51.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Wolfe F, Michaud K, Pincus T. Development and validation of the health assessment questionnaire II: a revised version of the health assessment questionnaire. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(10):3296–305.CrossRefPubMed Wolfe F, Michaud K, Pincus T. Development and validation of the health assessment questionnaire II: a revised version of the health assessment questionnaire. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(10):3296–305.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference McHorney CA. Generic health measurement: past accomplishments and a measurement paradigm for the 21st century. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(8 Pt 2):743–50.CrossRefPubMed McHorney CA. Generic health measurement: past accomplishments and a measurement paradigm for the 21st century. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(8 Pt 2):743–50.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Backman CL. Outcome measures for arthritis care research: recommendations from the CARE III conference. J Rheumatol. 2006;33(9):1908–11.PubMed Backman CL. Outcome measures for arthritis care research: recommendations from the CARE III conference. J Rheumatol. 2006;33(9):1908–11.PubMed
9.
go back to reference Rubenach S, Shadbolt B, McCallum J, Nakamura T. Assessing health-related quality of life following myocardial infarction: is the SF-12 useful? J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55(3):306–9.CrossRefPubMed Rubenach S, Shadbolt B, McCallum J, Nakamura T. Assessing health-related quality of life following myocardial infarction: is the SF-12 useful? J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55(3):306–9.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Beaton DE, Richards RR. Measuring function of the shoulder. A cross-sectional comparison of five questionnaires. J Bone Joint SurgAm Vol. 1996;78(6):882–90.CrossRef Beaton DE, Richards RR. Measuring function of the shoulder. A cross-sectional comparison of five questionnaires. J Bone Joint SurgAm Vol. 1996;78(6):882–90.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Chen AL, Broadhead WE, Doe EA, Broyles WK. Patient acceptance of two health status measures: the medical outcomes study short-form general health survey and the Duke health profile. Fam Med. 1993;25(8):536–9.PubMed Chen AL, Broadhead WE, Doe EA, Broyles WK. Patient acceptance of two health status measures: the medical outcomes study short-form general health survey and the Duke health profile. Fam Med. 1993;25(8):536–9.PubMed
12.
go back to reference CA MH, Earl Bricker D Jr. A qualitative study of patients' and physicians' views about practice-based functional health assessment. Med Care. 2002;40(11):1113–25.CrossRef CA MH, Earl Bricker D Jr. A qualitative study of patients' and physicians' views about practice-based functional health assessment. Med Care. 2002;40(11):1113–25.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Hambleton RK. Emergence of item response modeling in instrument development and data analysis. Med Care. 2000;38(9 Suppl):II60–5.PubMed Hambleton RK. Emergence of item response modeling in instrument development and data analysis. Med Care. 2000;38(9 Suppl):II60–5.PubMed
14.
go back to reference Wainer H. Computerized adaptive testing: a primer. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000. Wainer H. Computerized adaptive testing: a primer. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000.
15.
go back to reference Jette AM, Haley SM. Contemporary measurement techniques for rehabilitation outcomes assessment. J Rehabil Med. 2005;37(6):339–45.CrossRefPubMed Jette AM, Haley SM. Contemporary measurement techniques for rehabilitation outcomes assessment. J Rehabil Med. 2005;37(6):339–45.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Jette AM, CM MD, Haley SM, Ni P, Olarsch S, Latham N, Hambleton RK, Felson D, Kim YJ, Hunter D. A computer-adaptive disability instrument for lower extremity osteoarthritis research demonstrated promising breadth, precision, and reliability. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(8):807–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jette AM, CM MD, Haley SM, Ni P, Olarsch S, Latham N, Hambleton RK, Felson D, Kim YJ, Hunter D. A computer-adaptive disability instrument for lower extremity osteoarthritis research demonstrated promising breadth, precision, and reliability. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(8):807–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Jette AM, McDonough CM, Ni P, Haley SM, Hambleton RK, Olarsch S, Hunter DJ, Kim YJ, Felson DT. A functional difficulty and functional pain instrument for hip and knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Res Therapy. 2009;11(4):R107.CrossRef Jette AM, McDonough CM, Ni P, Haley SM, Hambleton RK, Olarsch S, Hunter DJ, Kim YJ, Felson DT. A functional difficulty and functional pain instrument for hip and knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Res Therapy. 2009;11(4):R107.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Fries JF, Bruce B, Bjorner J, Rose M: More relevant, precise, and efficient items for assessment of physical function and disability: moving beyond the classic instruments. Ann Rheum Dis 2006, 65 Suppl 3(Journal Article):iii16–21. Fries JF, Bruce B, Bjorner J, Rose M: More relevant, precise, and efficient items for assessment of physical function and disability: moving beyond the classic instruments. Ann Rheum Dis 2006, 65 Suppl 3(Journal Article):iii16–21.
19.
go back to reference Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, Rothrock N, Reeve B, Yount S, Amtmann D, Bode R, Buysse D, Choi S, et al. The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(11):1179–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, Rothrock N, Reeve B, Yount S, Amtmann D, Bode R, Buysse D, Choi S, et al. The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(11):1179–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Cella D, Yount S, Rothrock N, Gershon R, Cook K, Reeve B, Ader D, Fries JF, Bruce B, Rose M, 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(5 Suppl 1):S3–S11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cella D, Yount S, Rothrock N, Gershon R, Cook K, Reeve B, Ader D, Fries JF, Bruce B, Rose M, 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(5 Suppl 1):S3–S11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Rose M, Bjorner JB, Gandek B, Bruce B, Fries JF, Ware JE. The PROMIS physical function item bank was calibrated to a standardized metric and shown to improve measurement efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(5):516–26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rose M, Bjorner JB, Gandek B, Bruce B, Fries JF, Ware JE. The PROMIS physical function item bank was calibrated to a standardized metric and shown to improve measurement efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(5):516–26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Bjorner JB, Chang CH, Thissen D, Reeve BB. Developing tailored instruments: item banking and computerized adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res. 2007;16(Suppl 1):95–108.CrossRefPubMed Bjorner JB, Chang CH, Thissen D, Reeve BB. Developing tailored instruments: item banking and computerized adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res. 2007;16(Suppl 1):95–108.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Randall DP, Jennifer MB. Applying a weighted maximum Likelihood Latent Trait Estimator to the Generalized Partial Credit Model. Appl Psychol Meas. 2005;29(3):218–33.CrossRef Randall DP, Jennifer MB. Applying a weighted maximum Likelihood Latent Trait Estimator to the Generalized Partial Credit Model. Appl Psychol Meas. 2005;29(3):218–33.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Warm TA. Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika. 1989;54(3):427–50.CrossRef Warm TA. Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika. 1989;54(3):427–50.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care. 1989;27(3 Suppl):S178–89.CrossRefPubMed Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care. 1989;27(3 Suppl):S178–89.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Haley SM, Fragala-Pinkham MA. Interpreting change scores of tests and measures used in physical therapy. Phys Ther. 2006;86(5):735–43.PubMed Haley SM, Fragala-Pinkham MA. Interpreting change scores of tests and measures used in physical therapy. Phys Ther. 2006;86(5):735–43.PubMed
27.
go back to reference Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Sciences, 1, 98–101. In.; 1992. Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Sciences, 1, 98–101. In.; 1992.
28.
go back to reference Driban JB, Morgan N, Price LL, Cook KF, Wang C. Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) instruments among individuals with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional study of floor/ceiling effects and construct validity. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015;16(1):253.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Driban JB, Morgan N, Price LL, Cook KF, Wang C. Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) instruments among individuals with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional study of floor/ceiling effects and construct validity. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015;16(1):253.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference French HP Fitzpatrick M, FitzGerald O: Responsiveness of physical function outcomes following physiotherapy intervention for osteoarthritsi of the knee: an outcome comparison study. Physiotherapy 2011, 97(4):302-308. French HP Fitzpatrick M, FitzGerald O: Responsiveness of physical function outcomes following physiotherapy intervention for osteoarthritsi of the knee: an outcome comparison study. Physiotherapy 2011, 97(4):302-308.
31.
go back to reference Spadoni GF, Stratford PW, Solomon PE, Wishart LR. The evaluation of change in pain intensity: a comparison of the P4 and single-item numeric pain rating scales. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;34(4):187–93.CrossRefPubMed Spadoni GF, Stratford PW, Solomon PE, Wishart LR. The evaluation of change in pain intensity: a comparison of the P4 and single-item numeric pain rating scales. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;34(4):187–93.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Engström CP, Persson LO, Larsson S, Sullivan M. Health-related quality of life in COPD: why both disease-specific and generic measures should be used. Eur Respir J. 2001;18(1):69–76.CrossRefPubMed Engström CP, Persson LO, Larsson S, Sullivan M. Health-related quality of life in COPD: why both disease-specific and generic measures should be used. Eur Respir J. 2001;18(1):69–76.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Juhl C, Lund H, Roos EM, Zhang W, Christensen R. A hierarchy of patient-reported outcomes for meta-analysis of knee osteoarthritis trials: empirical evidence from a survey of high impact journals. Arthritis. 2012;2012:136245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/136245. Epub 2012 Jun 26. Juhl C, Lund H, Roos EM, Zhang W, Christensen R. A hierarchy of patient-reported outcomes for meta-analysis of knee osteoarthritis trials: empirical evidence from a survey of high impact journals. Arthritis. 2012;2012:136245. http://​dx.​doi.​org/​10.​1155/​2012/​136245. Epub 2012 Jun 26.
Metadata
Title
Detecting functional change in response to exercise in knee osteoarthritis: a comparison of two computerized adaptive tests
Authors
Feng-Hang Chang
Alan M. Jette
Mary D. Slavin
Kristin Baker
Pengsheng Ni
Julie J. Keysor
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-018-1942-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2018 Go to the issue