Is the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Feasible in Bundled Payment for Care Improvement in Total Hip Arthroplasty Patients?

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is increasingly used to assess patient health. The Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative for total hip arthroplasty (THA) was introduced to decrease costs and improve clinical care. We investigated differences between BPCI and non-BPCI THA patients and their PROMIS scores, along with its feasibility and responsiveness in these populations.

We included all consecutive patients receiving unilateral primary THA who also had preoperative and one-year postoperative PROMIS physical function (PF), PROMIS pain interference (PI), and PROMIS depression (DEP) scores. Demographics and PROMIS scores were compared. Test burden was assessed using the number of questions and time required for PROMIS completion. The minimum clinically important difference was defined as 5. Floor and ceiling effects were noted if more than 15% of patients responded with the lowest or highest possible score, respectively. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare categorical data. ANOVA was used for PROMIS comparisons.

290 hips (86 BPCI, 30%) were included. The BPCI cohort was older ( P < .001) with a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification system ( P = .0045). There were significant differences in baseline scores of PF and DEP between BPCI and non-BPCI ( P = .046 and P = .048, respectively). Both groups showed significant improvement at follow-up in all scores (all P < .001). Significantly more non-BPCI patients achieved minimum clinically important difference at follow-up in PI and PF ( P = .047 and P = .023, respectively). Floor effects were identified for DEP at baseline and follow-up and for PI at follow-up only.

PROMIS is feasible and time-efficient in BPCI patients undergoing primary THA. There were significant differences between BPCI and non-BPCI hips.

Level III.