Development of a PROMIS item bank to measure pain interference. Pain

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Box 357920, Seattle, WA 98195-7920, USA.
Pain (Impact Factor: 5.21). 07/2010; 150(1):173-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.04.025
Source: PubMed


This paper describes the psychometric properties of the PROMIS-pain interference (PROMIS-PI) bank. An initial candidate item pool (n=644) was developed and evaluated based on the review of existing instruments, interviews with patients, and consultation with pain experts. From this pool, a candidate item bank of 56 items was selected and responses to the items were collected from large community and clinical samples. A total of 14,848 participants responded to all or a subset of candidate items. The responses were calibrated using an item response theory (IRT) model. A final 41-item bank was evaluated with respect to IRT assumptions, model fit, differential item function (DIF), precision, and construct and concurrent validity. Items of the revised bank had good fit to the IRT model (CFI and NNFI/TLI ranged from 0.974 to 0.997), and the data were strongly unidimensional (e.g., ratio of first and second eigenvalue=35). Nine items exhibited statistically significant DIF. However, adjusting for DIF had little practical impact on score estimates and the items were retained without modifying scoring. Scores provided substantial information across levels of pain; for scores in the T-score range 50-80, the reliability was equivalent to 0.96-0.99. Patterns of correlations with other health outcomes supported the construct validity of the item bank. The scores discriminated among persons with different numbers of chronic conditions, disabling conditions, levels of self-reported health, and pain intensity (p<0.0001). The results indicated that the PROMIS-PI items constitute a psychometrically sound bank. Computerized adaptive testing and short forms are available.

Download full-text


Available from: Leigh Callahan
  • Source
    • "PROMIS Depression items assess negative mood, negative views of the self, negative cognitions, and decreased positive emotion and engagement. Unlike traditional, static assessment tools that utilize a composite score using a set number of items, PROMIS instruments are based on an Item Response Theorybased assessment that utilizes item-level responses [2] [20]. PROMIS measures utilize U.S. population norms and have a mean of 50 points and a standard deviation of 10 points [6]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Individuals with chronic pain show a greater vulnerability to depression or anger than those without chronic pain, and also show greater interpersonal difficulties and physical disability. The current study examined data from 675 individuals with chronic pain during their initial visits to a tertiary care pain clinic using assessments from Stanford University's Collaborative Health Outcomes Information Registry (CHOIR). Using a path modeling analysis, the mediating roles of PROMIS Physical Function and PROMIS Satisfaction with Social Roles and Activities were tested between pain intensity and PROMIS Depression and Anger. Pain intensity significantly predicted both depression and anger, and both physical function and satisfaction with social roles mediated these relationships when modeled in separate 1-mediator models. Notably, however, when modeled together, ratings of satisfaction with social roles mediated the relationship between physical function and both anger and depression. Our results suggest that the process by which chronic pain disrupts emotional well-being involves both physical function and disrupted social functioning. However, the more salient factor in determining pain-related emotional distress appears to be disruption of social relationships, rather than global physical impairment. These results highlight the particular importance of social factors to pain-related distress, and highlight social functioning as an important target for clinical intervention in chronic pain.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2015 · Pain
  • Source
    • "It would still be interesting to study psychometric properties of the NDI in different populations, for example in patients with Whiplash Associated Disorders (WAD), and with larger sample sizes in the subgroups. It would also be very interesting to study the suggested shorter versions with an improved factor structure or to compare NDI scores with other legacy instruments or with recently developed IRT item banks for pain behaviour and pain interference [30,31]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Reported values of the minimal important change (MIC) and the smallest detectable change (SDC) for the neck disability index (NDI) differ strongly, raising questions about the generalizability of these parameters. The SDC and the MIC are possibly influenced by the study design or by the study population. We studied the influence of the type of anchor, the definition of improvement and population characteristics on the SDC and the MIC of the NDI. A cohort study including 101 patients with non-specific, chronic neck pain. SDC and MIC were calculated using two types of external anchors. For each anchor we applied two different definitions to dichotomize the population into improved and unimproved patients. The influence of patient characteristics was assessed in relevant subgroups: patients with or without radiating pain and patients with different baseline scores. The influence of different anchors and different definitions of improvement on estimates of the SDC and the MIC was only minimal. The SDC and the MIC were similar for subgroups of patients with or without radiation, but differed strongly for subgroups of patients with higher or lower baseline scores. Our study shows that estimates of the SDC and the MIC of the NDI can be influenced by population characteristics. It is concluded that we cannot adopt a single change score to define relevant change by combining the result of previous studies.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2014 · Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
  • Source
    • "A second assumption pertains to local independence, that is, for respondents with the same latent trait, two items are expected to be statistically independent of each other (i.e., their covariance approaches zero). After extraction of the first factor, residual correlations greater than .10 are indicative of minor dependencies between items, whereas values greater than .20 indicate serious dependencies (Amtmann et al., 2010). The residual correlations for all four subscales were very low, | res r | < .04 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The German Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-A[G]) for adolescents assesses four regulatory styles within Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory: intrinsic, identified, introjected, and external regulation. The study on N = 2,123 students (1,057 girls) from secondary schools in Austria analyzes the effects of differential item functioning (DIF) on individual and group-level estimates of the latent regulatory styles. The scale demonstrated small DIF for sex and the ages from 10 to 17. The DIF items favored, if anything, younger students and lead to a slight overestimation of their introjected motivation level. However, the practical impact on group-level means was negligible. The SRQ-A[G] represents a reliable instrument to capture sex- and age-related differences in the four regulatory styles throughout adulthood.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2014 · European Journal of Psychological Assessment
Show more