PROMIS Fatigue short forms are reliable and valid in adults with rheumatoid arthritis

Clifton O Bingham Iii, Anna Kristina Gutierrez, Alessandra Butanis, Vivian P Bykerk, Jeffrey R Curtis, Amye Leong, Anne Lyddiatt, W Benjamin Nowell, Ana Maria Orbai, Susan J Bartlett, Clifton O Bingham Iii, Anna Kristina Gutierrez, Alessandra Butanis, Vivian P Bykerk, Jeffrey R Curtis, Amye Leong, Anne Lyddiatt, W Benjamin Nowell, Ana Maria Orbai, Susan J Bartlett

Abstract

Background: Fatigue is prevalent and impactful in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). There is no standardized measure for its assessment nor data concerning the performance of PROMIS-Fatigue short forms (SFs) in people with RA. We evaluated the construct validity of 4-, 7-, and 8-item PROMIS-Fatigue SFs in RA patients across the range of disease activity.

Methods: Adult RA patients were recruited from an online patient community and an observational cohort from three academic medical centers. Measures included PROMIS-Fatigue SFs, other PROMIS measures, and other patient reported outcomes including RAND-36 Vitality, Fatigue NRS, and patient global assessment of disease activity. Other measures from the observational cohort included 28-joint swollen and tender joints, physician global assessment, and the composite RA clinical disease activity index (CDAI).

Results: Two-hundred online participants and 348 participants from the observational cohort were included. PROMIS Fatigue SF scores spanned the measurement continuum and correlated highly with each other (r's ≥ 0.91) and other fatigue measures (r's ≥ 0.85). PROMIS-Fatigue SF scores were highly and inversely associated with Physical Function and Participation (r's - 0.77 to - 0.78), and moderately-highly and positively correlated with pain, sleep disturbance, anxiety, and depression (r's 0.60 to 0.75). PROMIS-Fatigue SF scores showed dose-response relationships across fatigue severity descriptors and CDAI categories.

Conclusions: These results provide robust evidence supporting the construct validity of the 4, 7, and 8-item PROMIS-Fatigue SFs. They capture fatigue across the spectrum of RA disease activity in diverse groups of individuals and should be considered for use as patient-centered assessments of disease control and treatment efficacy.

Keywords: Fatigue; PROMIS; Patient reported outcomes; Rheumatoid arthritis; Validation.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This research was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by review boards at Johns Hopkins (IRB00059765 and 0059930) with additional approval at University of Alabama at Birmingham (X150722003) and The Hospital for Special Surgery (2015–238). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Distribution of PROMIS Fatigue 7a, 8a, and 4a scores
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Bland-Altman plot showing correspondence between scores of PROMIS Fatigue short forms. Lines represent average difference and ± 1.96 standard deviation of the difference
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Box plots showing median and upper and lower interquartile ranges (IQR) of PROMIS Fatigue 4a, 7a, and 8a scores across Clinical Disease Activity Index levels and patient fatigue descriptors. Asterisks represent extreme scores > 1.5 IQR. REM = remission; LDA = low disease activity; MDA = moderate disease activity; HAD = high disease activity

References

    1. Kirwan JR, Hewlett S. Patient perspective: Reasons and methods for measuring fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2007;34:1171–1173.
    1. Hewlett S, Cockshott Z, Byron M, Kitchen K, Tipler S, Pope D, Hehir M. Patients’ perceptions of fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis: Overwhelming, uncontrollable, ignored. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;53:697–702. doi: 10.1002/art.21450.
    1. Katz P. Fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2017;19:25. doi: 10.1007/s11926-017-0649-5.
    1. Sanderson T, Morris M, Calnan M, Richards P, Hewlett S. Patient perspective of measuring treatment efficacy: The rheumatoid arthritis patient priorities for pharmacologic interventions outcomes. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2010;62:647–656. doi: 10.1002/acr.20151.
    1. Kirwan JR, Minnock P, Adebajo A, Bresnihan B, Choy E, de Wit M, Hazes M, Richards P, Saag K, Suarez-Almazor M, et al. Patient perspective: Fatigue as a recommended patient centered outcome measure in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2007;34:1174–1177.
    1. Felson DT, Smolen JS, Wells G, Zhang B, van Tuyl LH, Funovits J, Aletaha D, Allaart CF, Bathon J, Bombardieri S, et al. American College of Rheumatology/European league against rheumatism provisional definition of remission in rheumatoid arthritis for clinical trials. Arthritis Rheum. 2011;63:573–586. doi: 10.1002/art.30129.
    1. Hewlett S, Dures E, Almeida C. Measures of fatigue: Bristol rheumatoid arthritis fatigue multi-dimensional questionnaire (BRAF MDQ), Bristol rheumatoid arthritis fatigue numerical rating scales (BRAF NRS) for severity, effect, and coping, Chalder fatigue questionnaire (CFQ), checklist Individual Strength (CIS20R and CIS8R), Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Functional Assessment Chronic Illness Therapy (Fatigue) (FACIT-F), Multi-Dimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF), Multi-Dimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI), Pediatric Quality Of Life (PedsQL) Multi-Dimensional Fatigue Scale, Profile of Fatigue (ProF), Short Form 36 Vitality Subscale (SF-36 VT), and Visual Analog Scales (VAS) Arthritis Care Res. 2011;63(Suppl 11):S263–S286. doi: 10.1002/acr.20579.
    1. Aletaha D, Landewe R, Karonitsch T, Bathon J, Boers M, Bombardier C, Bombardieri S, Choi H, Combe B, Dougados M, et al. Reporting disease activity in clinical trials of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: EULAR/ACR collaborative recommendations. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59:1371–1377. doi: 10.1002/art.24123.
    1. Cella D, Lai JS, Jensen SE, Christodoulou C, Junghaenel DU, Reeve BB, Stone AA. PROMIS fatigue item Bank had clinical validity across diverse chronic conditions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;73:128–134. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.037.
    1. Cook KF, Jensen SE, Schalet BD, Beaumont JL, Amtmann D, Czajkowski S, Dewalt DA, Fries JF, Pilkonis PA, Reeve BB, et al. PROMIS measures of pain, fatigue, negative affect, physical function, and social function demonstrated clinical validity across a range of chronic conditions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;73:89–102. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.038.
    1. Lai JS, Cella D, Choi S, Junghaenel DU, Christodoulou C, Gershon R, Stone A. How item banks and their application can influence measurement practice in rehabilitation medicine: A PROMIS fatigue item bank example. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92:S20–S27. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.08.033.
    1. Bartlett SJ, Orbai AM, Duncan T, DeLeon E, Ruffing V, Clegg-Smith K, Bingham CO., 3rd Reliability and validity of selected PROMIS measures in people with rheumatoid arthritis. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0138543. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138543.
    1. Bartlett, S. J, Gutierrez, A. K., Butanis, A., Bykerk, V. P., Curtis, J., R., Ginsberg, S., Leong, A., L., Lyddiatt, A., Nowell, W., B., Orbai, A., M., Smith, K., C., Bingham, C., O. 3rd. (2018) Combining online and in-person methods to evaluate the content validity of promis fatigue short forms in rheumatoid arthritis. Qual Life Res, 27 (9):2443-2451. 10.1007/s11136-018-1880-x. Epub 2018 May 24. PMID: 29797175
    1. Karlson EW, Sanchez-Guerrero J, Wright EA, Lew RA, Daltroy LH, Katz JN, Liang MH. A connective tissue disease screening questionnaire for population studies. Ann Epidemiol. 1995;5:297–302. doi: 10.1016/1047-2797(94)00096-C.
    1. 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;63:1179–1194. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.011.
    1. Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM. The RAND 36-item health survey 1.0. Health Econ. 1993;2:217–227. doi: 10.1002/hec.4730020305.
    1. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric Theory. 3. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
    1. McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: Are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res. 1995;4:293–307. doi: 10.1007/BF01593882.
    1. Bartlett SJ, Hewlett S, Bingham CO, 3rd, Woodworth TG, Alten R, Pohl C, Choy EH, Sanderson T, Boonen A, Bykerk V, et al. Identifying core domains to assess flare in rheumatoid arthritis: An OMERACT international patient and provider combined Delphi consensus. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71:1855–1860. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2011-201201.
    1. Lai JS, Cella D, Yanez B, Stone A. Linking fatigue measures on a common reporting metric. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2014;48:639–648. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.12.236.
    1. Jensen RE, Moinpour CM, Potosky AL, Lobo T, Hahn EA, Hays RD, Cella D, Smith AW, Wu XC, Keegan TH, et al. Responsiveness of 8 patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) measures in a large, community-based cancer study cohort. Cancer. 2017;123:327–335. doi: 10.1002/cncr.30354.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnere