title: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Item Bank, Version 1.0: Physical Function Assessment for Athletic Patient Populations.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) item banks have been validated for general populations, but their application to high-functioning patient populations remains speculative.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To examine the measurement properties of the PROMIS physical function item bank, version 1.0, when applied to individuals representing high levels of physical ability.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cross-sectional study.
  
  
  METHODS
  National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I and III collegiate athletic training rooms and intramural events.
  
  
  METHODS
  A heterogeneous sample of 215 adults from Division I or Division III collegiate or recreational sports volunteered for this study. Participants were divided into 4 groups depending on sport activity and injury status: healthy collegiate (HC; 33 men, 37 women; age = 19.7 ± 1.1 years), injured and currently active in sport (IP; 21 men, 29 women; age = 19.9 ± 1.2 years), injured and currently not active in sport (INP; 12 men, 18 women; age = 19.7 ± 1.3 years), and healthy recreational (HR; 47 men, 18 women; age = 20.1 ± 1.4 years).
  
  
  METHODS
  Participants completed 2 assessments: (1) an injury-history questionnaire and (2) the PROMIS physical function item bank, version 1.0, in computer-adaptive form. Mean PROMIS physical function scores were determined for each group.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The PROMIS physical function score for the HC group (61.7 ± 6.0) was higher than for the IP (54.9 ± 7.5) and INP (44.1 ± 8.2) groups (P < .001). The IP group had a higher score than the INP group (P < .001). Mean PROMIS scores were not different between the HC and HR participants (mean difference = 1.9, P = .10).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The computer-adaptive PROMIS physical function item bank, version 1.0, accurately distinguished injury status in elite-level athletes on a physical function latent trait continuum. Although it was unable to distinguish HC athletes from HR athletes, exposing a possible ceiling effect, it offers potential for use as an outcome instrument for athletic trainers and other sports medicine clinicians.
authors.affiliation: Indiana University, Bloomington.
authors.forename: Leif P
authors.initials: LP
authors.lastname: Madsen
authors.affiliation: University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls.
authors.forename: Todd A
authors.initials: TA
authors.lastname: Evans
authors.affiliation: University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls.
authors.forename: Kelli R
authors.initials: KR
authors.lastname: Snyder
authors.affiliation: Indiana University, Bloomington.
authors.forename: Carrie L
authors.initials: CL
authors.lastname: Docherty
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D056352:Athletes; D001265:Athletic Injuries / Q000503:physiopathology*; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care / Q000379:methods*; D000071066:Patient Reported Outcome Measures; D010809:Physical Fitness / Q000502:physiology*; D013178:Sports Medicine / Q000379:methods*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D055815:Young Adult
keywords: PROMIS; athletic injuries; clinical decision making