scholarly journals Percutaneous Stereotactic Radiofrequency Lesioning for Trigeminal Neuralgia

Neurosurgery ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 262-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vishruth K. Reddy ◽  
Scott L. Parker ◽  
Dennis T. Lockney ◽  
Samit A. Patrawala ◽  
Pei-Fang Su ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Trigeminal Neuralgia ◽  
Treatment Effectiveness ◽  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
Minimum Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Health Transition ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Minimum Detectable Change ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Transition Index

Abstract BACKGROUND: The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Barrow Neurological Institute Pain Scale (BNI-PS) are 2 patient-reported outcome (PRO) tools frequently used to rate pain from trigeminal neuralgia (TN). Outcomes studies often use these patient-reported outcomes to assess treatment effectiveness, but it is unknown exactly what degree of change in the numerical scores constitutes the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). MCID remains uninvestigated for percutaneous stereotactic radiofrequency lesioning (RFL), a common surgical procedure for TN. OBJECTIVE: To determine MCID values for the VAS and BNI-PS in patients undergoing RFL. METHODS: Forty-three consecutive patients with TN who underwent RFL by a single surgeon were prospectively assessed with the VAS and BNI-PS preoperatively and 3 years postoperatively. Three anchors were used to assign each patient's outcome: satisfaction, willingness to have the surgery again, and Health Transition Index. We then used 3 well-established, anchor-based methods to calculate MCID: average change, minimum detectable change, and change difference. RESULTS: Patients experienced substantial improvement in both VAS (9.81 vs 3.35; P < .001) and BNI-PS (4.95 vs 2.44; P < .001) after RFL. The 3 MCID calculation methods generated a range of MCID values for each of the PROs (VAS, 4.13-8.20; BNI-PS, 1.03-3.30). The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was greater for BNI-PS compared with VAS for all 3 anchors, indicating that BNI-PS is probably better suited for calculating MCID. CONCLUSION: RFL-specific MCID is variable on the basis of the calculation technique. With the use of the minimum detectable change calculation method with the Health Transition Index anchor, the minimum clinically important difference is 4.49 for VAS and 1.16 for BNI-PS after RFL for TN.

Differentiating minimum clinically important difference for primary and revision lumbar fusion surgeries

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leah Y. Carreon ◽  
Kelly R. Bratcher ◽  
Chelsea E. Canan ◽  
Lauren O. Burke ◽  
Mladen Djurasovic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Improvement ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Minimum Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Minimum Detectable Change ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Patient Reported

Object Previous studies have reported on the minimum clinically important difference (MCID), a threshold of improvement that is clinically relevant for lumbar degenerative disorders. Recent studies have shown that pre- and postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures vary among patients with different diagnostic etiologies. There is also concern that a patient's previous care experience may affect his or her perception of clinical improvement. This study determined if MCID values for the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), and back and leg pain are different between patients undergoing primary or revision lumbar fusion. Methods Prospectively collected preoperative and 1-year postoperative patient-reported HRQOLs, including the ODI, SF-36 physical component summary (PCS), and numeric rating scales (0–10) for back and leg pain, in patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion were analyzed. Patients were grouped into either the primary surgery or revision group. As the most widely accepted MCID values were calculated from the minimum detectable change, this method was used to determine the MCID. Results A total of 722 patients underwent primary procedures and 333 patients underwent revisions. There was no statistically significant difference in demographics between the groups. Each group had a statistically significant improvement at 1 year postoperatively compared with baseline. The minimum detectable change–derived MCID values for the primary group were 1.16 for back pain, 1.36 for leg pain, 12.40 for ODI, and 5.21 for SF-36 PCS. The MCID values for the revision group were 1.21 for back pain, 1.28 for leg pain, 11.79 for ODI, and 4.90 for SF-36 PCS. These values are very similar to those previously reported in the literature. Conclusions The MCID values were similar for the revision and primary lumbar fusion groups, even when subgroup analysis was done for different diagnostic etiologies, simplifying interpretation of clinical improvement. The results of this study further validate the use of patient-reported HRQOLs to measure clinical effectiveness, as a patient's previous experience with care does not seem to substantially alter an individual's perception of clinical improvement.

Microvascular Decompression for Classic Trigeminal Neuralgia

Neurosurgery ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 72 (5) ◽  
pp. 749-754 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vishruth K. Reddy ◽  
Scott L. Parker ◽  
Samit A. Patrawala ◽  
Dennis T. Lockney ◽  
Pei-Fang Su ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Trigeminal Neuralgia ◽  
Microvascular Decompression ◽  
Treatment Effectiveness ◽  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
Minimum Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Pain Scale ◽  
Critical Threshold ◽  
Point Estimate ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Preoperative Expectations

Abstract BACKGROUND: Outcomes studies use patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements to assess treatment effectiveness, but can lack direct clinical meaning. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) calculation provides a point estimate of the critical threshold needed to achieve clinically relevant treatment effectiveness. MCID remains uninvestigated for microvascular decompression (MVD), a common surgical procedure for trigeminal neuralgia. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine MCID for the most commonly used PRO measures of pain after MVD: Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Barrow Neurological Institute Pain Scale (BNI-PS). METHODS: Sixty consecutive patients with classic trigeminal neuralgia who decided to undergo MVD by a single surgeon were prospectively assessed with VAS and BNI-PS preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. Three anchors were used to assign each patient's outcome. We then used 3 well-established, anchor-based methods to calculate MCID. RESULTS: Patients experienced significant improvement in both VAS (9.9 vs 2.0, P < .001) and BNI-PS (5.0 vs 1.9, P < .001) after MVD. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was greater for BNI-PS than for VAS for all 3 anchors, indicating that BNI-PS is probably better suited for calculating MCID. The 3 MCID calculation methods generated a range of MCID values for each of the PROs (VAS: 1.40-8.87, BNI-PS: 0.95-3.26). CONCLUSION: MVD-specific MCID is highly variable based on calculation technique. Some of these calculations appear to either overestimate or underestimate the patients' preoperative expectations. When the different MCID methods are averaged, the results are clinically appropriate and consistent with preoperative expectations. The average MCID for VAS is 6.25 and for BNI-PS is 2.44.

Minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: understanding clinical versus statistical significance

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 471-478 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott L. Parker ◽  
Stephen K. Mendenhall ◽  
David N. Shau ◽  
Owoicho Adogwa ◽  
William N. Anderson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Minimum Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Stenosis ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Calculation Methods ◽  
Recurrent Stenosis ◽  
Minimum Detectable Change ◽  
Clinically Important Difference

Object Spine surgery outcome studies rely on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements to assess treatment effect, but the extent of improvement in the numerical scores of these questionnaires lacks a direct clinical meaning. Because of this, the concept of a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) has been used to measure the critical threshold needed to achieve clinically relevant treatment effectiveness. As utilization of spinal fusion has increased over the past decade, so has the incidence of same-level recurrent stenosis following index lumbar fusion, which commonly requires revision decompression and fusion. The MCID remains uninvestigated for any PROs in the setting of revision lumbar surgery for this pathology. Methods In 53 consecutive patients undergoing revision surgery for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis–associated back and leg pain, PRO measures of back and leg pain were assessed preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively, using the visual analog scale for back pain (VAS-BP) and leg pain (VAS-LP), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Physical and Mental Component Summary categories of the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12 PCS and MCS) for quality of life, Zung Depression Scale (ZDS), and EuroQol-5D health survey (EQ-5D). Four established anchor-based MCID calculation methods were used to calculate MCID (average change; minimum detectable change; change difference; and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis) for 2 separate anchors (health transition index of the SF-36 and the satisfaction index). Results All patients were available for 2-year PRO assessment. Two years after surgery, a significant improvement was observed for all PROs assessed. The 4 MCID calculation methods generated a range of MCID values for each of the PROs (VAS-BP 2.2–6.0, VAS-LP 3.9–7.5, ODI 8.2–19.9, SF-12 PCS 2.5–12.1, SF-12 MCS 7.0–15.9, ZDS 3.0–18.6, and EQ-5D 0.29–0.52). Each patient answered synchronously for the 2 anchors, suggesting both of these anchors are equally appropriate and valid for this patient population. Conclusions The same-level recurrent stenosis surgery-specific MCID is highly variable based on calculation technique. The “minimum detectable change” approach is the most appropriate method for calculation of MCIDs in this population because it was the only method to reliably provide a threshold above the 95% confidence interval of the unimproved cohort (greater than the measurement error). Based on this method, the MCID thresholds following neural decompression and fusion for symptomatic same-level recurrent stenosis are 2.2 points for VAS-BP, 5.0 points for VAS-LP, 8.2 points for ODI, 2.5 points for SF-12 PCS, 10.1 points for SF-12 MCS, 4.9 points for ZDS, and 0.39 QALYs for EQ-5D.

Detecting change in community participation with the Enfranchisement scale of the community participation indicators

2021 ◽  
pp. 026921552110521
Author(s):  
Jessica Kersey ◽  
Lauren Terhorst ◽  
Joy Hammel ◽  
Carolyn Baum ◽  
Joan Toglia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Community Participation ◽  
Functional Independence Measure ◽  
Minimum Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Functional Independence ◽  
Baseline Score ◽  
Sensitivity To Change ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Change Scores ◽  
Minimum Detectable Change ◽  
Clinically Important Difference

Objective This study determined the sensitivity to change of the Enfranchisement scale of the Community Participation Indicators in people with stroke. Data sources We analyzed data from two studies of participants with stroke: an intervention study and an observational study. Main measures The Enfranchisement Scale contains two subscales: the Importance subscale (feeling valued by and contributing to the community; range: 14–70) and the Control subscale (choice and control: range: 13–64). Data analysis Assessments were administered 6 months apart. We calculated minimum detectable change and minimal clinically important difference. Results The Control subscale analysis included 121 participants with a mean age of 61.2 and mild-moderate disability (Functional Independence Measure, mean = 97.9, SD = 24.7). On the Control subscale, participants had a mean baseline score of 51.4 (SD = 10.4), and little mean change (1.3) but with large variation in change scores (SD = 11.5). We found a minimum detectable change of 9 and a minimum clinically important difference of 6. The Importance subscale analysis included 116 participants with a mean age of 60.7 and mild-moderate disability (Functional Independence Measure, mean = 98.9, SD = 24.5). On the Importance subscale, participants had a mean baseline score of 44.1 (SD = 12.7), and again demonstrated little mean change (1.08) but with large variation in change scores (SD = 12.6). We found a minimum detectable change of 11 and a minimum clinically important difference 7. Conclusions The Control subscale required 9 points of change, and the Importance subscale required 11 points of change, to achieve statistically and clinically meaningful changes, suggesting adequate sensitivity to change.

The Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State for Commonly Used Patient-Reported Outcomes After Knee Cartilage Repair

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 193-199
Author(s):  
Jaskarndip Chahal ◽  
Drew A. Lansdown ◽  
Annabelle Davey ◽  
Aileen M. Davis ◽  
Brian J. Cole
Keyword(s):  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
International Knee Documentation Committee ◽  
Baseline Score ◽  
Limited Information ◽  
Knee Cartilage ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Younger Age ◽  
Cartilage Restoration ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: In patients undergoing cartilage restoration of the knee, limited information is available regarding clinically important difference (CID) and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) estimates for commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Purpose: The objective of this study was to determine the CID and PASS in the population with knee cartilage restoration for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC) score, and the Lysholm score. Study Design: Cohort study (Diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Between 2012 and 2017, patients who underwent a cartilage restoration procedure were prospectively enrolled. Patients completed the KOOS, IKDC, and Lysholm, all of which were scored from 0 to 100, and completed relevant anchor questions at baseline and 1 year postoperatively. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were conducted to determine CID and PASS cutoff points. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to determine the effect of age, sex, and baseline score on likelihood of achieving CID and PASS. Results: Of the 113 patients enrolled, 53 (47%) were male, and the mean age was 36 years. The CID values for the PROMs were 10.7 for KOOS Symptoms, 8.3 for KOOS Pain, 8.8 for KOOS Activities of Daily Living (ADL), 30.0 for KOOS Sports and Recreation, 18.8 for KOOS Quality of Life (QOL), 9.2 for IKDC, and 13.0 for Lysholm. The PASS values were 71.5 for KOOS Symptoms, 72.2 for KOOS Pain, 86.8 for KOOS ADL, 43.8 for KOOS Sports and Recreation, 50.0 for KOOS QOL, 62.1 for IKDC, and 70.0 for Lysholm. Patients with higher baseline scores were more likely to achieve PASS for the IKDC (odds ratio, 2.28; P = .03). Baseline score did not have an effect on the likelihood of achieving CID. Younger age was an independent predictor of achieving PASS and CID across all outcomes ( P < .05), but sex did not have such an effect. Conclusion: This study determined CID and PASS values for the KOOS, IKDC, and Lysholm scores among patients treated with knee cartilage restoration. Younger age was a positive prognostic variable, and higher baseline scores implied achieving PASS for the IKDC. The information in this study can be used in designing randomized controlled trials, counseling individual patients as to anticipated outcomes, and conducting responder analyses when evaluating new cartilage technology from a regulatory perspective.

scholarly journals Changes in In Vivo Glenohumeral Joint Contact Patterns After Arthroscopic Superior Capsule Reconstruction

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (7_suppl6) ◽  
pp. 2325967120S0041
Author(s):  
Clarissa LeVasseur ◽  
Alexandra Gabrielli ◽  
Adam Popchak ◽  
James Irrgang ◽  
William Anderst ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Glenohumeral Joint ◽  
Functional Limitations ◽  
Minimum Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Shoulder Function ◽  
Rotator Cuff Tears ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Superior Capsule Reconstruction ◽  
Patient Reported

Objectives: Patients with irreparable rotator cuff tears (RCT) exhibit functional limitations believed to be caused by superior migration of the humerus1,2. One viable treatment is superior capsule reconstruction (SCR). SCR has been shown to restore stability of the glenohumeral (GH) joint in cadavers1, but its effectiveness at controlling in vivo humeral motion is unknown. Outcomes are typically evaluated through standard clinical radiographs to assess acromial-humeral distance (AHD), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) such as ASES and Visual Analog Scale3. Reported changes in AHD are inconsistent, with some studies reporting an increase in AHD of 2.6 to 3.2 mm4,7, while other studies reported no significant change5,6 in AHD after SCR. Scapulohumeral rhythm (SHR), a measure of shoulder motion fluidity, has been reported at 2:1 (glenohumeral to scapulothoracic motion) in healthy individuals9, but the effects of SCR on SHR are unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of SCR on static and dynamic AHD, shoulder function, and patient-reported outcomes. We hypothesized that after SCR, static and dynamic AHD would increase, SHR would approximate that of a healthy shoulder, maximum GH abduction would increase, and PROs would improve. Methods: Ten patients with irreparable RCT provided informed consent prior to receiving human dermal allograft SCR. To date, seven (6M, 1F, age 60 ± 8 years) have returned for 1 year post-operative testing. ASES, DASH, and WORC surveys were completed before (PRE), 6 months (6MO-POST), and 1-year after SCR (1YR-POST). Synchronized biplane radiographs of the shoulder were collected PRE and 1YR-POST at 50 images/s while patients performed 3 trials of scapular plane arm abduction. Six degree of freedom GH and scapular kinematics were determined with sub-millimeter accuracy by matching subject-specific CT-based bone models of the humerus and scapula to radiographs using a validated volumetric tracking technique8. AHD was calculated as the minimum distance between the acromion and the humerus at 5° increments of GH abduction. Scapulohumeral rhythm (SHR) was calculated by finding the average change in glenohumeral abduction per degree of scapular upward rotation during scapular abduction.Differences between PRE and 1YR-POST SHR and static AHD distance were evaluated using a paired t-test with significance set at p < 0.05. Changes in PROs were compared to the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Results: There was a trend toward decreasing static AHD from PRE to 1YR-POST (average decrease: 1.5±1.6mm (p=0.06), however, dynamic AHD did not change from PRE to 1 YR-POST between 45° and 95° of glenohumeral abduction (all p > 0.11) (Figure 1). There was a trend toward increased SHR from 1.1 ± 0.5 PRE to 1.5 ± 0.3 1YR-POST (p = 0.08) (Figure 2), while the increase in maximum GH abduction during scapular abduction from PRE (76.7°±24.5°) to 1YR-POST (91.8°±14.9°) was not statistically significant (p = 0.14) (Figure 2). ASES, WORC, and DASH scores improved beyond the minimum clinically important difference from PRE to 1YR-POST (Table 1) for all patients. Conclusion: In general, SHR tended to more closely resemble that of a healthy shoulder following SCR. Althoughaverage maximum GH abduction was higher postoperatively than preoperatively, that increase was not statistically significant and may reflect that most patients in our cohort had reasonable preoperative abduction. In contrast to those quantitative measures of shoulder function, patient-reported qualitative outcomes all improved significantly. Conflicting results between static and dynamic AHD during higher glenohumeral abduction angles suggest SCR does not appear to affect AHD in higher abduction angles, though the static AHD suggests there may be a difference at lower abduction angles. Dynamic measurements of AHD at lower abduction angles will be necessary to fully characterize the dynamic changes of AHD following SCR. [Figure: see text]

Comprehensive Assessment of 1-Year Outcomes and Determination of Minimum Clinically Important Difference in Pain, Disability, and Quality of Life After Suboccipital Decompression for Chiari Malformation I in Adults

Neurosurgery ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 569-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott L. Parker ◽  
Saniya S. Godil ◽  
Scott L. Zuckerman ◽  
Stephen K. Mendenhall ◽  
John A. Wells ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Minimum Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Numeric Rating Scale ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Difference Thresholds

Abstract BACKGROUND: To date, there has been no study to comprehensively assess the effectiveness of suboccipital craniectomy (SOC) for Chiari malformation I (CMI) using validated patient-reported outcome measures. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness and minimum clinically important difference thresholds of SOC for the treatment of adult patients with CMI using patient-reported outcome metrics. METHODS: Fifty patients undergoing first-time SOC and C1 laminectomy for CMI at a single institution were followed up for 1 year. Baseline and 1-year postoperative pain, disability, quality of life, patient satisfaction, and return to work were assessed. Minimum clinically important difference thresholds were calculated with 2 anchors: the Health Transition Index and North American Spine Society satisfaction questionnaire. RESULTS: The severity of headaches improved in 37 patients (74%). Improvement in syrinx size was seen in 12 patients (63%) and myelopathy in 12 patients (60%). All patient-reported outcomes showed significant improvement 1 year postoperatively (P &lt; .05). Of the 38 patients (76%) employed preoperatively, 29 (76%) returned to work postoperatively at a median time of 6 weeks (interquartile range, 4-12 weeks). Minimum clinically important difference thresholds after SOC for CMI were 4.4 points for numeric rating scale for headache, 0.7 points for numeric rating scale for neck pain, 13.8 percentage points for Headache Disability Index, 14.2 percentage points for Neck Disability Index, 7.0 points for Short Form-12 Physical Component Summary, 6.1 points for Short Form-12 Mental Component Summary, 4.5 points for Zung depression, 1.7 points for modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association, and 0.34 quality-adjusted life-years for Euro-Qol-5D. CONCLUSION: Surgical management of CMI in adults via SOC provides significant and sustained improvement in pain, disability, general health, and quality of life as assessed by patient-reported outcomes. This patient-centered assessment suggests that suboccipital decompression for CMI in adults is an effective treatment strategy.

scholarly journals Interpreting Patient-Reported Outcome Results: Is One Minimum Clinically Important Difference Really Enough?

Hand ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 360-364
Author(s):  
Dylan L. McCreary ◽  
Benjamin C. Sandberg ◽  
Debra C. Bohn ◽  
Harsh R. Parikh ◽  
Brian P. Cunningham
Keyword(s):  
Distal Radius ◽  
Treatment Modality ◽  
Emotional Health ◽  
Minimum Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Distal Radius Fractures ◽  
Radius Fractures ◽  
Time Points ◽  
Injury Characteristics ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are the gold standard for reporting clinical outcomes in research. A crucial component of interpreting PROs is the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) is a disease-specific PRO tool developed for use in distal radius fractures. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of injury characteristics, treatment modality, and calculation methodology on the PRWE MCID in distal radius fractures. We hypothesize the MCID would be significantly influenced by each of these factors. Methods: From 2014 to 2016, 197 patients with a distal radius fracture were treated at a single level I trauma center. Each patient was asked to complete a PRWE survey at preoperative baseline, 6-week postoperative, and 12-week postoperative dates. The MCID was derived utilizing 2 distinct strategies, anchor and distribution. Anchor questions involved overall health anchor and mental and emotional health anchor. Patient variables regarding demographics, injury characteristics, and treatment modality were collected. Results: The MCID was unique between analytical methods at all time points. The distribution MCID presented commonality across assessed variables. However, the anchor MCID was unique by AO/OTA fracture classifications, treatment modality, and time points. Conclusions: Our study found the MCID was heavily influenced by assessment time points, analytical method, treatment modality, and fracture classification. These results suggest that to accurately interpret PRO data in clinical trials, an anchor question should be included so that the MCID can be determined for the specific patient population included in the study.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document