scholarly journals Minimal clinically important difference and minimal detectable change of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) amongst patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
pp. 1506-1511
Author(s):  
Niina Katajapuu ◽  
Ari Heinonen ◽  
Mikhail Saltychev
Keyword(s):  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
World Health ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Average Intensity ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Whodas 2.0 ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
The Mean

Objectives: The aim of this study is to estimate a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and a minimal detectable change (MDC) of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 amongst patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Design: Cross-sectional cohort study. Setting: Outpatient Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine clinic. Subjects: A total of 1988 consecutive patients with musculoskeletal pain. Interventions: A distribution-based approach was employed to estimate a minimal clinically important difference, a minimal detectable change, and a minimal detectable percent change (MDC%). Results: The mean age of the patients was 48 years, and 65% were women. The average intensity of pain was 6,3 (2.0) points (0–10 numeric rating scale) and the mean WHODAS 2.0 total score was 13 (9) points out of 48. The minimal clinically important difference ranged between 3.1 and 4.7 points. The minimal detectable change was 8.6 points and minimal detectable % change was unacceptably high 66%. Conclusions: Amongst patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain, the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 demonstrated a high minimal detectable change of almost nine points. As the minimal detectable change exceeded the level of minimal clinically important difference, nine points were considered to be the amount of change perceived by a respondent as clinically significant.

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.

scholarly journals A study of the psychometric properties of 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in a large population of people with chronic musculoskeletal pain

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikhail Saltychev ◽  
Esa Bärlund ◽  
Ryan Mattie ◽  
Zachary McCormick ◽  
Jaana Paltamaa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
World Health ◽  
Disability Assessment ◽  
Discrimination Ability ◽  
Whodas 2.0 ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Disability Level

Objective: To assess the validity of the Finnish translation of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0). Design: Cross-sectional cohort survey study. Setting: Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine outpatient university clinic. Subjects: The 501 consecutive patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Main measures: Exploratory factor analysis and a graded response model using item response theory analysis were used to assess the constructs and discrimination ability of WHODAS 2.0. Results: The exploratory factor analysis revealed two retained factors with eigenvalues 5.15 and 1.04. Discrimination ability of all items was high or perfect, varying from 1.2 to 2.5. The difficulty levels of seven out of 12 items were shifted towards the elevated disability level. As a result, the entire test characteristic curve showed a shift towards higher levels of disability, placing it at the point of disability level of +1 (where 0 indicates the average level of disability within the sample). Conclusions: The present data indicate that the Finnish translation of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 is a valid instrument for measuring restrictions of activity and participation among patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

scholarly journals World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0): development and validation of the Nigerian Igbo version in patients with chronic low back pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chinonso Nwamaka Igwesi-Chidobe ◽  
Sheila Kitchen ◽  
Isaac Olubunmi Sorinola ◽  
Emma Louise Godfrey
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
World Health ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Whodas 2.0 ◽  
Rural Nigeria ◽  
Rural And Urban

Abstract Background Globally, the leading cause of years lived with disability is low back pain (LBP). Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is responsible for most of the cost and disability associated with LBP. This is more devastating in low income countries, particularly in rural Nigeria with one of the greatest global burdens of LBP. No Igbo back pain specific measure captures remunerative or non-remunerative work outcomes. Disability measurement using these tools may not fully explain work-related disability and community participation, a limitation not evident in the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0). This study aimed to cross-culturally adapt the WHODAS 2.0 and validate it in rural and urban Nigerian populations with CLBP. Methods Translation, cultural adaptation, test–retest, and cross-sectional psychometric testing was performed. WHODAS 2.0 was forward and back translated by clinical/non-clinical translators. Expert review committee evaluated the translations. Twelve people with CLBP in a rural Nigerian community piloted/pre-tested the questionnaire. Cronbach’s alpha assessing internal consistency; intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland–Altman plots assessing test–retest reliability; and minimal detectable change were investigated in a convenience sample of 50 adults with CLBP in rural and urban Nigeria. Construct validity was examined using Spearman’s correlation analyses with the back-performance scale, Igbo Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and eleven-point box scale; and exploratory factor analysis in a random sample of 200 adults with CLBP in rural Nigeria. Ceiling and floor effects were investigated in both samples. Results Patient instructions were also translated. ‘Waist pain/lower back pain’ was added to ‘illness(es)’ to make the measure relevant for this study whilst allowing for future studies involving other conditions. The Igbo phrase for ‘family and friends’ was used to better represent ‘people close to you’ in item D4.3. The Igbo-WHODAS had good internal consistency (α = 0.75–0.97); intra class correlation coefficients (ICC = 0.81–0.93); standard error of measurements (5.05–11.10) and minimal detectable change (13.99–30.77). Igbo-WHODAS correlated moderately with performance-based disability, self-reported back pain-specific disability and pain intensity, with a seven-factor structure and no floor and ceiling effects. Conclusions Igbo-WHODAS appears psychometrically sound. Its research and clinical utility require further testing.

scholarly journals Definition of Nonresponse to Analgesic Treatment of Arthritic Pain: An Analytical Literature Review of the Smallest Detectable Difference, the Minimal Detectable Change, and the Minimal Clinically Important Difference on the Pain Visual Analog Scale

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa E. Stauffer ◽  
Stephanie D. Taylor ◽  
Douglas J. Watson ◽  
Paul M. Peloso ◽  
Alan Morrison
Keyword(s):  
Minimal Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Analog Scale ◽  
Analgesic Treatment ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Detectable Difference ◽  
Pain Visual Analog Scale ◽  
Smallest Detectable Difference ◽  
Definition Of

Our objective was to develop a working definition of nonresponse to analgesic treatment of arthritis, focusing on the measurement of pain on the 0–100 mm pain visual analog scale (VAS). We reviewed the literature to assess the smallest detectable difference (SDD), the minimal detectable change (MDC), and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). The SDD for improvement reported in three studies of rheumatoid arthritis was 18.6, 19.0, and 20.0. The median MDC was 25.4 for 7 studies of osteoarthritis and 5 studies of rheumatoid arthritis (calculated for a reliability coefficient of 0.85). The MCID increased with increasing baseline pain score. For baseline VAS tertiles defined by scores of 30–49, 50–65, and >65, the MCID for improvement was, respectively, 7–11 units, 19–27 units, and 29–37 units. Nonresponse can thus be defined in terms of the MDC for low baseline pain scores and in terms of the MCID for high baseline scores.

scholarly journals World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0): development and validation of the Nigerian Igbo version in patients with chronic low back pain

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chinonso N Igwesi-Chidobe ◽  
Sheila Kitchen ◽  
Isaac Olubunmi Sorinola ◽  
Emma Louise Godfrey
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
World Health ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Whodas 2.0 ◽  
Rural Nigeria ◽  
Rural And Urban

Abstract BackgroundGlobally, the leading cause of years lived with disability is low back pain (LBP). Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is responsible for most of the cost and disability associated with LBP. This is more devastating in low income countries, particularly in rural Nigeria with one of the greatest global burdens of LBP. No Igbo back pain specific measure captures remunerative or non-remunerative work outcomes. Disability measurement using these tools may not fully explain work-related disability and community participation, a limitation not evident in the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0). This study aimed to cross-culturally adapt the WHODAS 2.0 and validate it in rural and urban Nigerian populations with CLBP.MethodsTranslation, cultural adaptation, test–retest, and cross-sectional psychometric testing was performed. WHODAS 2.0 was forward and back translated by clinical/non-clinical translators. Expert review committee evaluated the translations. Twelve people with CLBP in a rural Nigerian community piloted/pre-tested the questionnaire. Cronbach’s alpha assessing internal consistency; intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland–Altman plots assessing test–retest reliability; and minimal detectable change were investigated in a convenient sample of 50 adults with CLBP in rural and urban Nigeria. Construct validity was examined using Spearman’s correlation analyses with the back-performance scale, Igbo Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and eleven-point box scale; and exploratory factor analysis in a random sample of 200 adults with CLBP in rural Nigeria. Ceiling and floor effects were investigated in both samples.ResultsPatient instructions were also translated. ‘Waist pain/lower back pain’ was added to ‘illness(es)’ to make the measure relevant for this study whilst allowing for future studies involving other conditions. The Igbo phrase for ‘family and friends’ was used to better represent ‘people close to you’ in item D4.3. The Igbo-WHODAS had good internal consistency (α = 0.75–0.97); intra class correlation coefficients (ICC = 0.81–0.93); standard error of measurements (5.05–11.10) and minimal detectable change (13.99–30.77). Igbo-WHODAS correlated moderately with performance-based disability, self-reported back pain-specific disability and pain intensity, with a seven-factor structure and no floor and ceiling effects.ConclusionsIgbo-WHODAS appears psychometrically sound. Its research and clinical utility require further testing.

scholarly journals World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0): development and validation of the Nigerian Igbo version in patients with chronic low back pain

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chinonso N Igwesi-Chidobe ◽  
Sheila Kitchen ◽  
Isaac Olubunmi Sorinola ◽  
Emma Louise Godfrey
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
World Health ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Whodas 2.0 ◽  
Rural Nigeria ◽  
Rural And Urban

Abstract BackgroundGlobally, the leading cause of years lived with disability is low back pain (LBP). Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is responsible for most of the cost and disability associated with LBP. This is more devastating in low income countries, particularly in rural Nigeria with one of the greatest global burdens of LBP. No Igbo back pain specific measure captures remunerative or non-remunerative work outcomes. Disability measurement using these tools may not fully explain work-related disability and community participation, a limitation not evident in the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0). This study aimed to cross-culturally adapt the WHODAS 2.0 and validate it in rural and urban Nigerian populations with CLBP.Methods Translation, cultural adaptation, test–retest, and cross-sectional psychometric testing was performed. WHODAS 2.0 was forward and back translated by clinical/non-clinical translators. Expert review committee evaluated the translations. Twelve people with CLBP in a rural Nigerian community piloted/pre-tested the questionnaire. Cronbach’s alpha assessing internal consistency; intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland–Altman plots assessing test–retest reliability; and minimal detectable change were investigated in a convenient sample of 50 adults with CLBP in rural and urban Nigeria. Construct validity was examined using Spearman’s correlation analyses with the back-performance scale, Igbo Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and eleven-point box scale; and exploratory factor analysis in a random sample of 200 adults with CLBP in rural Nigeria. Ceiling and floor effects were investigated in both samples.ResultsPatient instructions were also translated. ‘Waist pain/lower back pain’ was added to ‘illness(es)’ to make the measure relevant for this study whilst allowing for future studies involving other conditions. The Igbo phrase for ‘family and friends’ was used to better represent ‘people close to you’ in item D4.3. The Igbo-WHODAS had good internal consistency (α = 0.75–0.97); intra class correlation coefficients (ICC = 0.81–0.93); standard error of measurements (5.05–11.10) and minimal detectable change (13.99–30.77). Igbo-WHODAS correlated moderately with performance-based disability, self-reported back pain-specific disability and pain intensity, with a seven-factor structure and no floor and ceiling effects.ConclusionsIgbo-WHODAS appears psychometrically sound. Its research and clinical utility require further testing.

scholarly journals World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0): development and validation of the Nigerian Igbo version in patients with chronic low back pain

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chinonso N Igwesi-Chidobe ◽  
Sheila Kitchen ◽  
Isaac Olubunmi Sorinola ◽  
Emma Louise Godfrey
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
World Health ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Whodas 2.0 ◽  
Rural Nigeria ◽  
Rural And Urban

Abstract BackgroundGlobally, the leading cause of years lived with disability is low back pain (LBP). Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is responsible for most of the cost and disability associated with LBP. This is more devastating in low income countries, particularly in rural Nigeria with one of the greatest global burdens of LBP. No Igbo back pain specific measure captures remunerative or non-remunerative work outcomes. Disability measurement using these tools may not fully explain work-related disability and community participation, a limitation not evident in the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0). This study aimed to cross-culturally adapt the WHODAS 2.0 and validate it in rural and urban Nigerian populations with CLBP.Methods Translation, cultural adaptation, test–retest, and cross-sectional psychometric testing was performed. WHODAS 2.0 was forward and back translated by clinical/non-clinical translators. Expert review committee evaluated the translations. Twelve people with CLBP in a rural Nigerian community piloted/pre-tested the questionnaire. Cronbach’s alpha assessing internal consistency; intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland–Altman plots assessing test–retest reliability; and minimal detectable change were investigated in a convenient sample of 50 adults with CLBP in rural and urban Nigeria. Construct validity was examined using Spearman’s correlation analyses with the back-performance scale, Igbo Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and eleven-point box scale; and exploratory factor analysis in a random sample of 200 adults with CLBP in rural Nigeria. Ceiling and floor effects were investigated in both samples.ResultsPatient instructions were also translated. ‘Waist pain/lower back pain’ was added to ‘illness(es)’ to make the measure relevant for this study whilst allowing for future studies involving other conditions. The Igbo phrase for ‘family and friends’ was used to better represent ‘people close to you’ in item D4.3. The Igbo-WHODAS had good internal consistency (α = 0.75–0.97); intra class correlation coefficients (ICC = 0.81–0.93); standard error of measurements (5.05–11.10) and minimal detectable change (13.99–30.77). Igbo-WHODAS correlated moderately with performance-based disability, self-reported back pain-specific disability and pain intensity, with a seven-factor structure and no floor and ceiling effects.ConclusionsIgbo-WHODAS appears psychometrically sound. Its research and clinical utility require further testing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document