scholarly journals Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Substantial Clinical Benefit, and Patient Acceptable Symptom State of Outcome Measures Relating to Shoulder Pathology and Surgery: a Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Favian Su ◽  
Sachin Allahabadi ◽  
Dale N. Bongbong ◽  
Brian T. Feeley ◽  
Drew A. Lansdown
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Shoulder Pathology ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Substantial Clinical Benefit ◽  
Patient Acceptable Symptom State

Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit After Revision Hip Arthroscopy

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 1862-1868 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benedict U. Nwachukwu ◽  
Brenda Chang ◽  
Ben-Zion Rotter ◽  
Bryan T. Kelly ◽  
Anil S. Ranawat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Substantial Clinical Benefit

Establishing the Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State, and Substantial Clinical Benefit of the PROMIS Upper Extremity Questionnaire After Rotator Cuff Repair

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (14) ◽  
pp. 3439-3446
Author(s):  
Eric D. Haunschild ◽  
Ron Gilat ◽  
Michael C. Fu ◽  
Tracy Tauro ◽  
Hailey P. Huddleston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Substantial Clinical Benefit ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Cuff Repair

Background: The Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Upper Extremity (PROMIS UE) questionnaire has been validated as an effective and efficient outcome measure after rotator cuff repair (RCR). However, definitions of clinically significant outcomes used in interpreting this outcome measure have yet to be defined. Purpose: To define clinically significant outcomes of the PROMIS UE questionnaire in patients undergoing arthroscopic RCR. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. Methods: We reviewed charts of consecutive patients undergoing RCR in our institution between 2017 and 2018 and included patients who were administered the PROMIS UE before surgery and 12 months after surgery. At 12 months postoperatively, patients were asked domain-specific anchor questions regarding their function and satisfaction after surgery, which were then used to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) using receiver operating characteristic and area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was utilized to identify patient factors associated with clinically significant outcomes. Results: A total of 105 patients with RCR and minimum 12-month postoperative PROMIS UE were included in the analysis. The defined clinically significant outcomes were 4.87 for the MCID using a distribution-based method, 7.95 for the SCB (sensitivity, 0.708; specificity, 0.833; AUC, 0.760), and 39.00 for the PASS (sensitivity, 0.789; specificity, 0.720; AUC, 0.815). Among respondents, 79.0%, 62.9%, and 64.8% achieved the MCID, SCB, and PASS score thresholds, respectively. Workers’ compensation was negatively associated with achievement of the PASS. Lower preoperative PROMIS UE scores were associated with obtaining the MCID (odds ratio [OR], 0.871; P = .001) and the SCB (OR, 0.900; P = .040), whereas higher preoperative scores were predictive of achieving the PASS (OR, 1.111; P = .020). Conclusion: This study defines the clinically significant outcomes for the PROMIS UE after RCR, of which the majority of patients achieved the MCID, PASS, and SCB at 12 months after surgery. These thresholds should be considered in future study design and interpretation of PROMIS UE in patients with RCR.

scholarly journals The Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit in the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Patients Undergoing Osteochondral Allograft Transplantation in the Knee

Cartilage ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takahiro Ogura ◽  
Jakob Ackermann ◽  
Alexandre Barbieri Mestriner ◽  
Gergo Merkely ◽  
Andreas H. Gomoll
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Curve Analysis ◽  
Osteochondral Allograft ◽  
Roc Curve Analysis ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Substantial Clinical Benefit ◽  
Patient Reported

Objective Little is known regarding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) with regard to the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Lysholm score, and Short Form 12 (SF-12) score of patients who undergo osteochondral allograft transplantation (OCA). We aimed to determine the MCID and SCB associated with those patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after OCA. Design We analyzed the data of 86 consecutive patients who underwent OCA and who completed satisfaction surveys at a minimum of 1 year postoperatively and had at least one repeated PROM. MCID was determined using an anchor-based method: the optimal cutoff point for receiver operative characteristic (ROC) curves. If an anchor-based method was inapplicable, distribution-based methods were employed. SCB was determined using ROC curve analysis. Results Based on the ROC curve analysis, MCID was 16.7 for KOOS pain, 25 for KOOS sports/recreation, and 9.8 for IKDC. SCB was 27.7 for KOOS pain, 10.7 for KOOS symptom, 30 for KOOS sports/recreation, 31.3 for KOOS quality of life, 26.9 for IKDC, 25 for Lysholm, and 12.1 for SF-12 physical component summary. No significant association was noted between SCB achievement and the baseline patient factors and baseline PROMs. Conclusion We demonstrated the MCIDs and SCBs of several PROMs in patients undergoing OCA. These results will aid the interpretation of the effect of treatment and clinical trial settings. Moreover, the SCBs will help surgeons in the counseling of patients, where patients expect optimal results rather than minimal improvement.

Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit Values for the 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 411-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
RobRoy L. Martin ◽  
Benjamin R. Kivlan ◽  
John J. Christoforetti ◽  
Andrew B. Wolff ◽  
Shane J. Nho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Substantial Clinical Benefit ◽  
Outcome Tool

Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit Using PROMIS CAT in Cervical Spine Surgery

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (9) ◽  
pp. 392-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael E. Steinhaus ◽  
Sravisht Iyer ◽  
Francis Lovecchio ◽  
Benjamin Khechen ◽  
Daniel Stein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Spine ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Cervical Spine Surgery ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Substantial Clinical Benefit
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document