Comparative Responsiveness of the PROMIS Pain Interference Short Forms With Legacy Pain Measures: Results From Three Randomized Clinical Trials

Chen X. Chen, Kurt Kroenke, Timothy Stump, Jacob Kean, Erin E. Krebs, Matthew J. Bair, Teresa Damush, Patrick O. Monahan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) scales are reliable and publicly accessible; however, little is known about how responsive they are to detect change in clinical trials and how their responsiveness compares with legacy measures. The study purpose was to evaluate responsiveness for the PROMIS-PI scales and to compare their responsiveness with legacy pain measures. We used data from 3 clinical trials totaling 759 participants. The clinical trials included patients with chronic low back pain (n = 261), chronic back or osteoarthritis pain (n = 240), and a history of stroke (n = 258). At both baseline and follow-up, participants completed PROMIS-PI scales and legacy pain measures (Brief Pain Inventory Interference scale; Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity scale; 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) Bodily Pain scale; and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire). We measured global ratings of pain change, both prospectively and retrospectively, as anchors to identify patients as improved, unchanged, or worsened. Responsiveness was assessed with standardized response means, statistical tests comparing change groups, and area under the curve analysis. The PROMIS-PI scales had largely comparable responsiveness with the Brief Pain Inventory Interference and Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity scales. The 4 PROMIS-PI short forms had comparable responsiveness. For all pain questionnaires, responsiveness varied based on the study population and whether pain improved or worsened. Perspective: This article presents 1) how responsive the PROMIS-PI scales were to detect change over time in the context of 3 clinical trials and 2) how their responsiveness compared with legacy pain measures. The findings can help researchers and clinicians choose between different patient-reported pain outcome measures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Pain
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Randomized Controlled Trials
Pain
Information Systems
Clinical Trials
Equipment and Supplies
Low Back Pain
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Osteoarthritis
Area Under Curve
Stroke

Keywords

  • Pain interference
  • pain measurement
  • patient-reported outcome measures
  • PROMIS
  • responsiveness

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

@article{aaa6c42b90154219ac05ddf811aa8743,
title = "Comparative Responsiveness of the PROMIS Pain Interference Short Forms With Legacy Pain Measures: Results From Three Randomized Clinical Trials",
abstract = "The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) scales are reliable and publicly accessible; however, little is known about how responsive they are to detect change in clinical trials and how their responsiveness compares with legacy measures. The study purpose was to evaluate responsiveness for the PROMIS-PI scales and to compare their responsiveness with legacy pain measures. We used data from 3 clinical trials totaling 759 participants. The clinical trials included patients with chronic low back pain (n = 261), chronic back or osteoarthritis pain (n = 240), and a history of stroke (n = 258). At both baseline and follow-up, participants completed PROMIS-PI scales and legacy pain measures (Brief Pain Inventory Interference scale; Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity scale; 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) Bodily Pain scale; and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire). We measured global ratings of pain change, both prospectively and retrospectively, as anchors to identify patients as improved, unchanged, or worsened. Responsiveness was assessed with standardized response means, statistical tests comparing change groups, and area under the curve analysis. The PROMIS-PI scales had largely comparable responsiveness with the Brief Pain Inventory Interference and Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity scales. The 4 PROMIS-PI short forms had comparable responsiveness. For all pain questionnaires, responsiveness varied based on the study population and whether pain improved or worsened. Perspective: This article presents 1) how responsive the PROMIS-PI scales were to detect change over time in the context of 3 clinical trials and 2) how their responsiveness compared with legacy pain measures. The findings can help researchers and clinicians choose between different patient-reported pain outcome measures.",
keywords = "Pain interference, pain measurement, patient-reported outcome measures, PROMIS, responsiveness",
author = "Chen, {Chen X.} and Kurt Kroenke and Timothy Stump and Jacob Kean and Krebs, {Erin E.} and Bair, {Matthew J.} and Teresa Damush and Monahan, {Patrick O.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpain.2018.11.010",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Pain",
issn = "1526-5900",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparative Responsiveness of the PROMIS Pain Interference Short Forms With Legacy Pain Measures

T2 - Results From Three Randomized Clinical Trials

AU - Chen, Chen X.

AU - Kroenke, Kurt

AU - Stump, Timothy

AU - Kean, Jacob

AU - Krebs, Erin E.

AU - Bair, Matthew J.

AU - Damush, Teresa

AU - Monahan, Patrick O.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) scales are reliable and publicly accessible; however, little is known about how responsive they are to detect change in clinical trials and how their responsiveness compares with legacy measures. The study purpose was to evaluate responsiveness for the PROMIS-PI scales and to compare their responsiveness with legacy pain measures. We used data from 3 clinical trials totaling 759 participants. The clinical trials included patients with chronic low back pain (n = 261), chronic back or osteoarthritis pain (n = 240), and a history of stroke (n = 258). At both baseline and follow-up, participants completed PROMIS-PI scales and legacy pain measures (Brief Pain Inventory Interference scale; Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity scale; 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) Bodily Pain scale; and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire). We measured global ratings of pain change, both prospectively and retrospectively, as anchors to identify patients as improved, unchanged, or worsened. Responsiveness was assessed with standardized response means, statistical tests comparing change groups, and area under the curve analysis. The PROMIS-PI scales had largely comparable responsiveness with the Brief Pain Inventory Interference and Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity scales. The 4 PROMIS-PI short forms had comparable responsiveness. For all pain questionnaires, responsiveness varied based on the study population and whether pain improved or worsened. Perspective: This article presents 1) how responsive the PROMIS-PI scales were to detect change over time in the context of 3 clinical trials and 2) how their responsiveness compared with legacy pain measures. The findings can help researchers and clinicians choose between different patient-reported pain outcome measures.

AB - The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) scales are reliable and publicly accessible; however, little is known about how responsive they are to detect change in clinical trials and how their responsiveness compares with legacy measures. The study purpose was to evaluate responsiveness for the PROMIS-PI scales and to compare their responsiveness with legacy pain measures. We used data from 3 clinical trials totaling 759 participants. The clinical trials included patients with chronic low back pain (n = 261), chronic back or osteoarthritis pain (n = 240), and a history of stroke (n = 258). At both baseline and follow-up, participants completed PROMIS-PI scales and legacy pain measures (Brief Pain Inventory Interference scale; Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity scale; 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) Bodily Pain scale; and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire). We measured global ratings of pain change, both prospectively and retrospectively, as anchors to identify patients as improved, unchanged, or worsened. Responsiveness was assessed with standardized response means, statistical tests comparing change groups, and area under the curve analysis. The PROMIS-PI scales had largely comparable responsiveness with the Brief Pain Inventory Interference and Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity scales. The 4 PROMIS-PI short forms had comparable responsiveness. For all pain questionnaires, responsiveness varied based on the study population and whether pain improved or worsened. Perspective: This article presents 1) how responsive the PROMIS-PI scales were to detect change over time in the context of 3 clinical trials and 2) how their responsiveness compared with legacy pain measures. The findings can help researchers and clinicians choose between different patient-reported pain outcome measures.

KW - Pain interference

KW - pain measurement

KW - patient-reported outcome measures

KW - PROMIS

KW - responsiveness

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85059779765&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85059779765&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpain.2018.11.010

DO - 10.1016/j.jpain.2018.11.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 30529442

AN - SCOPUS:85059779765

JO - Journal of Pain

JF - Journal of Pain

SN - 1526-5900

ER -