Validity of the PROMIS-10 Global Health assessed by telephone and on paper in minor stroke and transient ischaemic attack in the Netherlands.

Objectives: Dysfunction after transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and minor stroke is often underestimated by clinical measures. Patient-reported outcome measures used in value-based healthcare may help in detecting these problems. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 10-Question Short Form (PROMIS-10 Global Health) is a concise patient-centred outcome measuring tool proposed for assessing health status in patients who had stroke. This study aims to address the validity of the Dutch PROMIS-10 in patients who had stroke in the Netherlands and also aims to compare telephone versus on-paper assessment.
Design: Observational cohort study.
Setting: Single-centre hospital in the Netherlands.
Participants: 75 patients who were diagnosed with TIA or minor stroke and discharged without rehabilitation treatment 1 year ago (between December 2014 and January 2016) completed the study.
Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: PROMIS-10 physical (PH) and mental health (MH) scores assessed 1 year poststroke on paper (n=37) and by telephone (n=38) was compared with RAND-36 physical and mental component scores assessed on paper.
Results: PROMIS-10 and RAND-36 correlated significantly in PH, r=0.81 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.88), and MH, r=0.76 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.85). Paper-and-pencil assessed correlations were r=0.87 and 0.79 for PH and MH, respectively. Telephone assessed correlations were r=0.76 and 0.73 for PH and MH, respectively. Internal consistency analysis indicated high reliabilities for both health components of the PROMIS-10, all Cronbach's α>0.70.
Conclusions: The Dutch PROMIS-10 was found to strongly correlate with the RAND-36. Paper-and-pencil assessment was found to have a higher correlation than telephone assessment. This study provides support for the use of the Dutch PROMIS-10 in assessing health status in patients after TIA and minor stroke.
Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.
(© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)