title: PROMIS Physical Function Computer Adaptive Test Compared With Other Upper Extremity Outcome Measures in the Evaluation of Proximal Humerus Fractures in Patients Older Than 60 Years.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the PROMIS Physical Function Computer Adaptive Test (PROMIS PF CAT) to commonly used traditional PF measures for the evaluation of patients with proximal humerus fractures.
  
  
  METHODS
  Prospective.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two Level I trauma centers.
  
  
  METHODS
  Forty-seven patients older than 60 years with displaced proximal humerus fractures treated between 2006 and 2009.
  
  
  METHODS
  Evaluation included completion of the PROMIS PF CAT, the Constant Shoulder Score, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) and the Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA).
  
  
  METHODS
  Observed correlations among the administered PF outcome measures.
  
  
  RESULTS
  On average, patients responded to 86 outcome-related items for this study: 4 for the PROMIS PF CAT (range: 4-8 items), 6 for the Constant Shoulder Score, 30 for the DASH, and 46 for the SMFA. Time to complete the PROMIS PF CAT (median completion time = 98 seconds) was significantly less than that for the DASH (median completion time = 336 seconds, P < 0.001) and for the SMFA (median completion time = 482 seconds, P < 0.001). PROMIS PF CAT scores correlated statistically significantly and were of moderate-to-high magnitude with all other PF outcome measure scores administered.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This study suggests using the PROMIS PF CAT as a sole PF outcome measure can yield an assessment of upper extremity function similar to those provided by traditional PF measures, while substantially reducing patient assessment time.
authors.affiliation: *Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; †Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL; ‡Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; and §Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA.
authors.forename: Jordan H
authors.initials: JH
authors.lastname: Morgan
authors.forename: Michael A
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Kallen
authors.forename: Kanu
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Okike
authors.forename: Olivia C
authors.initials: OC
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Mark S
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Vrahas
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D003936:Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D017102:Fracture Healing; D015577:Geriatric Assessment / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care / Q000379:methods*; D010808:Physical Examination / Q000379:methods*; D020127:Recovery of Function; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D012784:Shoulder Fractures / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000628:therapy*; D015599:Trauma Severity Indices