scholarly journals Minimal clinically important difference for the historic parts of the Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 ◽  
pp. 79-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Attila Makkos ◽  
Márton Kovács ◽  
Dávid Pintér ◽  
József Janszky ◽  
Norbert Kovács
Keyword(s):  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Clinically Important Difference

scholarly journals Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Patient Reported Outcome Measures of Lower Extremity Injuries in Orthopedics

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2_suppl2) ◽  
pp. 2325967117S0007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derya Çelik ◽  
Özge Çoban ◽  
Önder Kılıçoğlu
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Outcome Score ◽  
Patient Reported

Purpose: MCID scores for outcome measures are frequently used evidence-based guides to gage meaningful changes. To conduct a systematic review of the quality and content of the the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) relating to 16 patient-rated outcome measures (PROM) used in lower extremity. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review on articles reporting MCID in lower extremity outcome measures and orthopedics from January 1, 1980, to May 10, 2016. We evaluated MCID of the 16 patient reported outcome measures (PROM) which were Harris Hip Score (HHS), Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Hip Outcome Score (HOS), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC), The Lysholm Scale, The Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET), The Anterior Cruciate Ligament Quality of Life Questionnaire (ACL-QOL), The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), The Western Ontario and Mcmaster Universities Index (WOMAC), Knee İnjury And Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Kujala Anterior Knee Pain Scale, The Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment Patellar Tendinosis (Jumper’s Knee) (VİSA-P), Tegner Activity Rating Scale, Marx Activity Rating Scale, Foot And Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), The Foot Function Index (FFI), Foot And Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), The Foot And Ankle Disability Index Score and Sports Module, Achill Tendon Total Rupture Score(ATRS), The Victorian İnstitute Of Sports Assesment Achilles Questionnaire(VİSA-A), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS). A search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, PEDro and Cochrane Cen¬tral Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science databases from the date of inception to May 1, 2016 was conducted. The terms “minimal clinically important difference,” “minimal clinically important change”, “minimal clinically important improvement” “were combined with one of the PROM as mentioned above. Results: A total of 223 abstracts were reviewed and 119 articles chosen for full text review. Thirty articles were included in the final evaluation. The MCID was mostly calculated for WOMAC and frequently reported in knee and hip osteoartritis, knee and hip atrhroplasties, femoraasetabular impingement syndrome and focal cartilage degeneration. In addition, Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis was the most used method to report MCID. Conclusions: MCID is an important concept used to determine whether a medical intervention improves perceived outcomes in patients. Despite an abundance of methods reported in the literature, little work in MCID estimation has been done in the PRAM related to lower extremity. There is a need for future studies in this regard.

scholarly journals An observational cohort study of pelvic floor photobiomodulation for treatment of chronic pelvic pain

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeraj Kohli ◽  
Barry Jarnagin ◽  
Angela R Stoehr ◽  
Georgine Lamvu
Keyword(s):  
Pelvic Pain ◽  
Chronic Pelvic Pain ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Vulvar Pain ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Observational Cohort ◽  
Numeric Pain Rating Scale ◽  
Pain Rating Scale

Aim: This research is the first to evaluate the effectiveness of trans-vaginal photobiomodulation therapy (TV-PBMT) for chronic pelvic pain. Materials & methods: Observational analysis of 128 women, undergoing TV-PBMT for chronic pelvic pain. Minimal Clinically Important Difference, defined as ≥2-point drop on a 0–10 numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), and effect size Cohen d coefficient, was calculated over nine treatments for overall pain, and pain with activities. Results: Compared with baseline, 64.5% of women showed improvement in overall pain, pain with bowel movement, intercourse, exercise, urination, sitting and vulvar pain (Minimal Clinically Important Difference = -2.4, -2.0, -2.4, -2.1, -2.1, -2.0, -3.1; d = 0.9, 0.7, 0.9, 0.7, 0.7, 0.7, 0.9) by treatment 9. Conclusion: In this cohort, TV-PBMT resulted in improvement of pelvic pain without serious adverse events.

scholarly journals Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Parkinson’s Disease as Assessed in Pivotal Trials of Pramipexole Extended Release

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert A. Hauser ◽  
Mark Forrest Gordon ◽  
Yoshikuni Mizuno ◽  
Werner Poewe ◽  
Paolo Barone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Immediate Release ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Off Time

Background. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is the smallest change in an outcome measure that is meaningful for patients.Objectives. To calculate the MCID for Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) scores in early Parkinson’s disease (EPD) and for UPDRS scores and “OFF” time in advanced Parkinson’s disease (APD).Methods. We analyzed data from two pivotal, double-blind, parallel-group trials of pramipexole ER that included pramipexole immediate release (IR) as an active comparator. We calculated MCID as the mean change in subjects who received active treatment and rated themselves “a little better” on patient global impression of improvement (PGI-I) minus the mean change in subjects who received placebo and rated themselves unchanged.Results. MCIDs in EPD (pramipexole ER, pramipexole IR) for UPDRS II were −1.8 and −2.0, for UPDRS III −6.2 and −6.1, and for UPDRS II + III −8.0 and −8.1. MCIDs in APD for UPDRS II were −1.8 and −2.3, for UPDRS III −5.2 and −6.5, and for UPDRS II + III −7.1 and −8.8. MCID for “OFF” time (pramipexole ER, pramipexole IR) was −1.0 and −1.3 hours.Conclusions. A range of MCIDs is emerging in the PD literature that provides the basis for power calculations and interpretation of clinical trials.

scholarly journals Weather sensitivity associated with quality of life in patients with fibromyalgia

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuhiro Hayashi ◽  
Kenji Miki ◽  
Noriyuki Hayashi ◽  
Ryota Hashimoto ◽  
Masao Yukioka
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Weather Sensitivity ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Tertiary Center ◽  
Scale Scores ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background Fibromyalgia is characterized by chronic widespread pain, and more than half of patients with fibromyalgia report that weather-related variables aggravate their symptoms. However, the differences in actual symptoms have not been measured between those with and without weather sensitivity. The present study aimed to investigate whether weather sensitivity associated with the minimal clinically important difference values of quality of life in patients with fibromyalgia, between those with and without weather sensitivity. Methods Sixty-four consecutive outpatients with fibromyalgia on their first visit to our tertiary center were included. Weather sensitivity was measured using self-perceived symptoms. Pain intensity was measured using the 0–10 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). Quality of life was measured using the Euro Quality of life-5 Dimensions-3 level (EQ-5D-3L) scale. The variables were subjected to univariable and multivariable analysis using the EQ-5D-3L scale. Results The mean age of the patients was 50 years. Forty-eight patients (75%) were women. The mean EQ-5D-3L score was 0.55. Thirty-seven patients (58%) reported weather sensitivity. In univariable analysis, the welfare recipient, weather sensitivity, and NRS values were associated with EQ-5D-3L scale scores. In multivariable analysis, NRS value and weather sensitivity were independently associated with EQ-5D-3L scale scores. The NRS and EQ-5D-3L scale scores were significantly worse in those with weather sensitivity than those without weather sensitivity. The difference in NRS values was less than 1.5 points between groups. The differences in EQ-5D-3L scale scores were 0.16 points between groups. Conclusions Weather sensitivity was significantly associated with quality of life in patients with fibromyalgia. There was an association with weather sensitivity and the minimal clinically important difference values of quality of life in patients with fibromyalgia. The presence of weather sensitivity could have a key role in the quality of life in patients with fibromyalgia.

scholarly journals Minimal Clinically Important Difference on Parkinson’s Disease Sleep Scale 2nd Version

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krisztina Horváth ◽  
Zsuzsanna Aschermann ◽  
Péter Ács ◽  
Gabriella Deli ◽  
József Janszky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Characteristic Analysis ◽  
Mattis Dementia Rating Scale ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Yahr Scale

Background and Aims. The aim of the present study was to determine the estimates of minimal clinically important difference for Parkinson’s Disease Sleep Scale 2nd version (PDSS-2) total score and dimensions.Methods. The subject population consisted of 413 PD patients. At baseline, MDS-UPDRS, Hoehn-Yahr Scale, Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, and PDSS-2 were assessed. Nine months later the PDSS-2 was reevaluated with the Patient-Reported Global Impression Improvement Scale. Both anchor-based techniques (within patients’ score change method and sensitivity- and specificity-based method by receiver operating characteristic analysis) and distribution-based approaches (effect size calculations) were utilized to determine the magnitude of minimal clinically important difference.Results. According to our results, any improvements larger than −3.44 points or worsening larger than 2.07 points can represent clinically important changes for the patients. These thresholds have the effect size of 0.21 and −0.21, respectively.Conclusions. Minimal clinically important differences are the smallest change of scores that are subjectively meaningful to patients. Studies using the PDSS-2 as outcome measure should utilize the threshold of −3.44 points for detecting improvement or the threshold of 2.07 points for observing worsening.

scholarly journals A prospective study to establish the minimal clinically important difference of the Mini-BESTest in individuals with stroke

2021 ◽  
pp. 026921552110251
Author(s):  
Marla K Beauchamp ◽  
Rudy Niebuhr ◽  
Patricia Roche ◽  
Renata Kirkwood ◽  
Kathryn M Sibley
Keyword(s):  
Stroke Rehabilitation ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Clinical Importance ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Global Rating ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Small Change ◽  
A Prospective Study

Objective: To determine the minimal clinically important difference of the Mini-BESTest in individuals’ post-stroke. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: Outpatient stroke rehabilitation. Subjects: Fifty outpatients with stroke with a mean (SD) age of 60.8 (9.4). Intervention: Outpatients with stroke were assessed with the Mini-BESTest before and after a course of conventional rehabilitation. Rehabilitation sessions occurred one to two times/week for one hour and treatment duration was 1.3–42 weeks (mean (SD) = 17.4(10.6)). Main measures: We used a combination of anchor- and distribution-based approaches including a global rating of change in balance scale completed by physiotherapists and patients, the minimal detectable change with 95% confidence, and the optimal cut-point from receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: The average (SD) Mini-BESTest score at admission was 18.2 (6.5) and 22.4 (5.2) at discharge (effect size: 0.7) ( P = 0.001). Mean change scores on the Mini-BESTest for patient and physiotherapist ratings of small change were 4.2 and 4.3 points, and 4.7 and 5.3 points for substantial change, respectively. The minimal detectable change with 95% confidence for the Mini-BESTest was 3.2 points. The minimally clinical importance difference was determined to be 4 points for detecting small changes and 5 points for detecting substantial changes. Conclusions: A change of 4–5 points on the Mini-BEST is required to be perceptible to clinicians and patients, and beyond measurement error. These values can be used to interpret changes in balance in stroke rehabilitation research and practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document