Minimal important change (MIC) based on a predictive modeling approach was more precise than MIC based on ROC analysis

The minimal important change is not a universal fixed value across diagnoses when using the FAOS and FAAM in patients undergoing elective foot and ankle surgery

PURPOSE

This study aimed to calculate region and diagnosis-specific minimal important changes (MICs) of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) in patients requiring foot and ankle surgery and to assess their variability across different foot and ankle diagnoses.

METHODS

The study used routinely collected data from patients undergoing elective foot and ankle surgery. Patients had been invited to complete the FAOS and FAAM preoperatively and at 3-6 months after surgery, along with two anchor questions encompassing change in pain and daily function. Patients were categorised according to region of pathology and subsequent diagnoses. MICs were calculated using predictive modelling (MICPRED) and receiver operating characteristic curve (MICROC) method and evaluated according to strict credibility criteria.

RESULTS

Substantial variability of the MICs between forefoot and ankle/hindfoot region was observed, as well as among specific foot and ankle diagnoses, with MICPRED and MICROC values ranging from 7.8 to 25.5 points and 9.4 to 27.8, respectively. Despite differences between MICROC and MICPRED estimates, both calculation methods exhibited largely consistent patterns of variation across subgroups, with forefoot conditions systematically showing smaller MICs than ankle/hindfoot conditions. Most MICs demonstrated high credibility; however, the majority of the MICs for the FAOS symptoms subscale and forefoot conditions exhibited insufficient or low credibility.

CONCLUSION

The MICs of the FAOS and FAAM vary across foot and ankle diagnoses in patients undergoing elective foot and ankle surgery and should not be used as a universal fixed value, but recognised as contextual parameters. This can help clinicians and researchers in more accurate interpretation of the FAOS and FAAM change scores.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Measurement Properties of the Oxford Shoulder Score and Minimal Clinically Important Changes After Primary Total Shoulder Replacement Surgery

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the measurement properties of the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) and estimated the minimal clinically important change (MCIC) in patients undergoing primary total shoulder replacement in Australia.

METHODS

Deidentified data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry were used for this analysis. Pre- and 6-month postoperative OSS scores were used, with the 5-level EuroQoL quality of life instrument and shoulder pain scores used as comparators. Floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness to change were evaluated using standard psychometric methods. Mean change and predictive modeling approaches (with and without adjustment for the proportion of improved patients) were used to calculate MCIC thresholds, with patient-perceived improvement after surgery as the anchor.

RESULTS

Preoperative OSS data were available for 1,117 patients (59% female; 90% aged ≥60 years) undergoing primary total shoulder replacement. No floor or ceiling effects were observed pre- or postoperatively. The OSS showed high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha >0.89), good construct validity, and high responsiveness to change (effect size 1.88). The MCIC derived from the mean change method was 6.50 points (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 4.41-8.61). The predictive modeling approach produced an MCIC estimate of 8.42 points (95% CI 5.68-12.23) after adjustment.

CONCLUSION

The OSS has good measurement properties to capture pain and function outcomes after shoulder replacement procedures and is highly responsive to change. Based on robust methods, an increase in OSS scores of at least eight points can be considered as meaningful improvement after surgery from the patient's perspective.

Minimal clinically important differences in health-related quality of life after treatment with direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C: ANRS CO22 HEPATHER cohort (PROQOL-HCV)

PURPOSE

Patient Reported Outcomes Quality of Life survey for HCV (PROQOL-HCV) is a specific tool developed to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with chronic hepatitis C receiving direct-acting antivirals (DAA). Thresholds for clinically meaningful changes in PROQOL-HCV scores should be documented to improve the tool's use in clinical practice. This study aimed to estimate the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) in PROQOL-HCV scores before and after HCV cure by DAA among participants in the prospective cohort ANRS-CO22 HEPATHER.

METHODS

Data from 460 chronic HCV patients were collected at DAA initiation (baseline) and 24 weeks after treatment end. MCIDs were estimated for the six HRQoL dimensions (Physical Health (PH), Emotional Health (EH), Future Uncertainty (FU), Intimate Relationships (IR), Social Health (SH), and Cognitive Functioning (CF)) using two approaches: anchor-based and score distribution-based. Each MCID was estimated for improvement/deterioration both globally and separately for patients with a baseline PRQoL-HCV score ≤ 50 (group1) and patients with a baseline PRQoL-HCV score > 50 (group2).

RESULTS

The pooled MCIDs for improvement/deterioration globally, in group1, and in group2, respectively, were as follows: 8.8/- 7.6, 9.7/- 9.5, and 6.0/- 6.9 for PH; 7.1/- 4.6, 7.7/- 9.6, and 6.6/- 6.7 for EH; 6.7/- 6.7, 8.2/- 8.2, and 6.0/- 6.0 for FU; 7.0/- 7.0, 5.4/- 5.4, and 6.2/- 6.2 for IR; 7.7/- 7.7, 8.6/- 8.6, and 6.5/- 6.5 for SH; 7.3/- 5.6, 9.1/- 8.0, and 6.5/- 6.3 for CF.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall MCID for the PROQOL-HCV scores ranged from 6.7 to 8.8 for improvement and from - 7.7 to - 4.6 for deterioration. The effect of DAA on PROQOL-HCV scores seemed particularly beneficial for patients with lower baseline scores. This subgroup could be motivated to take DAA if they are informed of the benefits for their HRQoL.

Comparison of the early postoperative outcomes of cementless and cemented medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Aims

The primary objective of this registry-based study was to compare patient-reported outcomes of cementless and cemented medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) during the first postoperative year. The secondary objective was to assess one- and three-year implant survival of both fixation techniques.

Methods

We analyzed 10,862 cementless and 7,917 cemented UKA cases enrolled in the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry, operated between 2017 and 2021. Pre- to postoperative change in outcomes at six and 12 months' follow-up were compared using mixed model analyses. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models were applied to quantify differences in implant survival. Adjustments were made for patient-specific variables and annual hospital volume.

Results

Change from baseline in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and activity-related pain was comparable between groups. Adjustment for covariates demonstrated a minimally greater decrease in rest-related pain in the cemented group (β = -0.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.16 to -0.01)). Cementless fixation was associated with a higher probability of achieving an excellent OKS outcome (> 41 points) (adjusted odds ratio 1.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.3)). The likelihood of one-year implant survival was greater for cemented implants (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.71)), with higher revision rates for periprosthetic fractures of cementless implants. During two to three years' follow-up, the likelihood of implant survival was non-significantly greater for cementless UKA (adjusted HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.04)), primarily due to increased revision rates for tibial loosening of cemented implants.

Conclusion

Cementless and cemented medial UKA led to comparable improvement in physical function and pain reduction during the initial postoperative year, albeit with a greater likelihood of achieving excellent OKS outcomes after cementless UKA. Anticipated differences in early physical function and pain should not be a decisive factor in the choice of fixation technique. However, surgeons should consider the differences in short- and long-term implant survival when deciding which implant to use.

WHICH SCALE TO ASSESS PAIN SELF-EFFICACY SHOWS BETTER MEASUREMENT PROPERTIES IN CHRONIC LOW BACK PAIN? A HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON STUDY

OBJECTIVE

to compare the quality of the measurement properties of PSEQ-10, PSEQ-4 and PSEQ-2 and CPSS (long-form: CPSS-LF and short-form: CPSS-SF) in patients with Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies (measurement properties) SETTING: Outpatient Rehabilitation PARTICIPANTS: 245 participants with non-specific CLBP (18 and 60 years, 63% female) were enrolled in this study.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain self-efficacy questionnaires were administered in three occasions: baseline assessment, one-week after the first assessment (reliability) and after an eight-week exercise program (responsiveness). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's α were used to assess reliability and internal consistency, respectively. Pearson's correlation and confirmatory factor analysis were used to assess construct validity. The area under the curve and hypothesis testing were used to assess responsiveness.

RESULTS

None difference was observed for all the questionnaires regarding internal consistency (Cronbach's α>.7), criterion validity (r>.88) and reliability (ICC>.7). The scales confirmed more than 75% of the hypotheses for the construct validity, except for CPSS-SF. PSEQ-2 did not meet the criterion for structural validity. PSEQ-10 met all the criteria for good measurement properties according to COSMIN.

CONCLUSIONS

It was not possible to calculate structural validity for PSEQ-2, CPSS-SF did not meet the criterion for suitable hypothesis testing for construct validity and all the questionnaires did not show suitable measurement error, except for the PSEQ-10. Hence, the PSEQ-10 was the unique scale that met all the criteria for good measurement properties for assessing pain self-efficacy in CLBP.

The construct validity, responsiveness, reliability and interpretability of the Recap of atopic eczema questionnaire (RECAP) in children

BACKGROUND

The Recap of atopic eczema questionnaire (RECAP) was developed to measure eczema control in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). The measurement properties of RECAP have not yet been validated in caregivers of children with AD.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the construct validity, responsiveness, reliability and interpretability of the Dutch proxy version of RECAP.

METHODS

A prospective validation study was conducted in children (aged < 12 years) with AD and their caregivers (in a Dutch tertiary hospital). At three timepoints (T0 = baseline; T1 = after 1-7 days; T2 = after 4-8 weeks) RECAP and multiple reference instruments were completed by caregivers of child patients. Single- and change-score validity (responsiveness) were tested with a priori hypotheses on correlations with reference instruments. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCagreement) and standard error of agreement (SEMagreement) were reported. Bands for perceived eczema control were proposed. The smallest detectable change (SDC) and minimally important change (MIC) were determined. Two anchor-based methods based on receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) and predictive modelling were used to determine the MIC.

RESULTS

A total of 231 children with AD and their caregivers participated. Of our a priori hypotheses for single-score and change-score validity, 77% and 80% were confirmed, respectively. A stronger correlation than hypothesized was found for all rejected hypotheses.Excellent reliability was found (ICCagreement = 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.90-0.96). The SEMagreement was 1.9 points. The final banding was 0-1 (completely controlled), 2-7 (mostly controlled), 8-12 (moderately controlled), 13-18 (a little controlled) and 19-28 (not at all controlled). A cutoff point of ≥ 8 was selected to identify children whose AD is not under control. The SDC was 5.3 and the MIC values were 1.5 and 3.6 for the ROC and predictive modelling approaches, respectively. No floor or ceiling effects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The proxy version of RECAP is a valid, reliable and responsive measurement instrument for measuring eczema control in children with AD. An improvement of ≥ 6 points can be regarded as a real and important change in children with AD.

Effect of Context Specificity on Response to the Shortened WOMAC Function Scale in Patients Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE

To determine, in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA), whether increasing context specificity of selected items of the shortened version of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index function (WOMAC-F) scale (ShortMAC-F) (1) enhanced the convergent validity of the ShortMAC-F with performance-based mobility measures (ii) affected mean scale score, structural validity, reliability, and interpretability.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of randomized clinical trial data.

SETTING

A tertiary teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing TKA (N=114).

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The ShortMAC-F was modified by specifying the "ascending stairs" and "rising from sitting" items to enquire about difficulty in performing the tasks without reliance on compensatory strategies, whereas the modified "level walking" item enquired about difficulty in walking 400 m. Before and 12 weeks after TKA, patients completed the WOMAC-F questionnaire, modified ShortMAC-F questionnaire, knee pain scale questionnaire, sit-to-stand test, fast gait speed test, and stair climb test. Interpretability was evaluated by calculating anchor-based substantial clinical benefit estimates.

RESULTS

The modified ShortMAC-F correlated significantly more strongly than ShortMAC-F or WOMAC-F with pooled performance measures (differences in correlation values, 0.12-0.14). Increasing item context specificity of the ShortMAC-F did not influence its psychometric properties of unidimensionality (comparative fit and Tucker-Lewis indices, >0.95; root mean square error of approximation, 0.05-0.08), reliability (Cronbach's α, 0.75-0.83), correlation with pain intensity (correlation values, 0.48-0.52), and substantial clinical benefit estimates (16 percentage points); however, it resulted in lower mean score (4.5-4.8 points lower).

CONCLUSIONS

The modified ShortMAC-F showed sufficient measurement properties for clinical application, and it seemed more adept than WOMAC-F at correlating with performance-based measures in TKA.

Patient acceptable symptom state and treatment failure threshold values for work productivity and activity Impairment and EQ-5D-5L in osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) and treatment failure (TF) threshold values for Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) measure and EQ-5D-5L among people with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) 3 and 12 months following participation in a digital self-management intervention (Joint Academy®).

METHODS

Among the participants, we computed work and activity impairments scores (both 0-100, with a higher value reflecting higher impairment) and the Swedish hypothetical- (range: - 0.314 to 1) and experience-based (range: 0.243-0.976) EQ-5D-5L index scores (a higher score indicates better health status) at 3- (n = 14,607) and 12-month (n = 2707) follow-ups. Threshold values for PASS and TF were calculated using anchor-based adjusted predictive modeling. We also explored the baseline dependency of threshold values according to pain severity at baseline.

RESULTS

Around 42.0% and 48.3% of the participants rated their current state as acceptable, while 4.2% and 2.8% considered the treatment had failed at 3 and 12 months, respectively. The 3-month PASS/TF thresholds were 16/29 (work impairment), 26/50 (activity impairment), 0.92/0.77 (hypothetical EQ-5D-5L), and 0.87/0.77 (the experience-based EQ-5D-5L). The thresholds at 12 months were generally comparable to those estimated at 3 months. There were baseline dependencies in PASS/TF thresholds with participants with more severe baseline pain considering poorer (more severe) level of WPAI/EQ-5D-5L as satisfactory.

CONCLUSION

PASS and TF threshold values for WPAI and EQ-5D-5L might be useful for meaningful interpretation of these measures among people with OA. The observed baseline dependency of estimated thresholds limits their generalizability and values should be applied with great caution in other settings/populations.

Progressive Resistance Training or Neuromuscular Exercise for Hip Osteoarthritis : A Multicenter Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Exercise is recommended as first-line treatment for patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). However, randomized controlled trials providing evidence for the optimal exercise type are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether progressive resistance training (PRT) is superior to neuromuscular exercise (NEMEX) for improving functional performance in patients with hip OA.

DESIGN

Multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, superiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04714047).

SETTING

Hospitals and physiotherapy clinics.

PARTICIPANTS

160 participants with clinically diagnosed hip OA were enrolled from 18 January 2021 to 28 April 2023 and randomly assigned to PRT (n = 82) or NEMEX (n = 78).

INTERVENTION

Twelve weeks of PRT or NEMEX with 2 supervised 60-minute group sessions each week. The PRT intervention consisted of 5 high-intensity resistance training exercises targeting muscles at the hip and knee joints. The NEMEX intervention included 10 exercises and emphasized sensorimotor control and functional stability.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was change in the 30-second chair stand test (30s-CST). Key secondary outcomes were changes in scores on the pain and hip-related quality of life (QoL) subscales of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS).

RESULTS

The mean changes from baseline to 12-week follow-up in the 30s-CST were 1.5 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.1) chair stands with PRT and 1.5 (CI, 0.9 to 2.1) chair stands with NEMEX (difference, 0.0 [CI, -0.8 to 0.8] chair stands). For the HOOS pain subscale, mean changes were 8.6 (CI, 5.3 to 11.8) points with PRT and 9.3 (CI, 5.9 to 12.6) points with NEMEX (difference, -0.7 [CI, -5.3 to 4.0] points). For the HOOS QoL subscale, mean changes were 8.0 (CI, 4.3 to 11.7) points with PRT and 5.7 (CI, 1.9 to 9.5) points with NEMEX (difference, 2.3 [CI, -3.0 to 7.6] points).

LIMITATION

Participants and physiotherapists were not blinded.

CONCLUSION

In patients with hip OA, PRT is not superior to NEMEX for improving functional performance, hip pain, or hip-related QoL.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Independent Research Fund Denmark.

Anchor-based minimal important difference values are often sensitive to the distribution of the change score

PURPOSE

Anchor-based studies are today the most popular approach to determine a minimal important difference value for an outcome variable. However, a variety of construction methods for such values do exist. This constitutes a challenge to the field. In order to distinguish between more or less adequate construction methods, meaningful minimal requirements can be helpful. For example, minimal important difference values should not reflect the intervention(s) the patients are exposed to in the study used for construction, as they should later allow to compare interventions. This requires that they are not sensitive to the distribution of the change score observed. This study aims at investigating to which degree established construction methods fulfil this minimal requirement.

METHODS

Six constructions methods were considered, covering very popular and recently suggested methods. The sensitivity of MID values to the distribution of the change score was investigated in a simulation study for these six construction methods.

RESULTS

Five out of six construction methods turned out to yield MID values which are sensitive to the distribution of the change score to a degree that questions their usefulness. Insensitivity can be obtained by using construction methods based solely on an estimate of the conditional distribution of the anchor variable given the change score.

CONCLUSION

In future the computation of MID values should be based on construction methods avoiding sensitivity to the distribution of the change score.

Responsiveness and minimal important changes of the OARSI core set of performance-based measures in patients with knee osteoarthritis following physiotherapy intervention

PURPOSE

The Osteoarthritis Research Society International has recommended a core set of performance-based tests of physical function for use in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients. The core set includes 30-second chair stand test (30-s CST), 4 × 10 m fast-paced walk test (40-m FPWT), and a stair climb test. This study aimed to evaluate responsiveness and minimal important changes (MICs) of these performance-based measures in knee OA patients following physiotherapy.

METHODS

Sixty patients with knee OA, undergoing 4-week physiotherapy performed 30-s CST, 40-m FPWT, and 4-step stair climb test (4-step SCT) at pre- and post-intervention. Patients also completed the 7-point global rating scale as an external anchor at post-intervention. Responsiveness was evaluated using receiver operating characteristics curve and correlation analysis.

RESULTS

All three performance-based measures of physical function showed area under the curve > 0.70. Correlation analysis showed relationship of 30-s CST, 40-m FPWT, and 4-Step SCT with the external anchor fell within moderate to good range (Spearman = 0.43-0.63). Furthermore, MIC values reflecting improvement for 30-s CST, 40-m FPWT, and 4-Step SCT were 2.5, 0.21, and 3.21, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrated all three performance-based measures have good responsiveness to measure improvement in physical functions of knee OA patients following physiotherapy. The MIC reflecting improvement can help clinicians and researchers to make a decision based on the clinical significance of improvements in patients' functional status.

Minimal important change thresholds change over time after knee and hip arthroplasty

OBJECTIVES

The minimal important change (MIC) reflects what patients, on average, consider the smallest improvement in a score that is important to them. MIC thresholds may vary across patient populations, interventions used, posttreatment time points and derivation methods. We determine and compare MIC thresholds for the Oxford Knee Score and Oxford Hip Score (OKS/OHS) at 3 months postoperatively to 12- and 24-month thresholds in patients undergoing knee or hip arthroplasty.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

This cohort study used data from patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA), unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), or total hip arthroplasty (THA) at a public hospital between February 2016 and February 2023. At 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively, patients responded to the OKS/OHS and a 7-point anchor question determining experienced changes in knee or hip pain and functional limitations. We used the adjusted predictive modeling method that accounts for the proportion improved and the reliability of the anchor question to determine MIC thresholds and their mean differences between time points.

RESULTS

Complete data were obtained from 695/957 (73%), 1179/1703 (69%), and 1080/1607 (67%) patients undergoing TKA, 474/610 (78%), 438/603 (73%), and 355/507 (70%) patients undergoing UKA, and 965/1315 (73%), 978/1409 (69%), and 1059/1536 (69%) patients undergoing THA at 3, 12, and 24 months, respectively. The median age ranged from 68 to 70 years and 55% to 60% were females. The proportions improved ranged between 83% and 95%. The OKS/OHS MIC thresholds were 0.1, 4.2, and 5.1 for TKA, 1.8, 5.6, and 3.4 for UKA, and 1.3, 6.1, and 6.0 for THA at 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively, respectively. The reliability ranged between 0.64 and 0.82, and the MIC values increased between three and 12 months but not between 12 and 24 months.

CONCLUSION

Any absence of deterioration in pain and function is considered important at 3 months after knee or hip arthroplasty. Increasing thresholds over time suggest patients raise their standards for what constitutes a minimal important improvement over the first postoperative year. Besides improving our understanding of patients' views on postoperative outcomes, these clinical thresholds may aid in interpreting registry-based treatment outcome evaluations.

Achieving satisfactory functional outcomes in conservatively treated proximal humerus fractures: relationship between shoulder range of motion and patient-reported clinical outcome scores

Background

Proximal humerus fractures are common osteoporotic fractures. Postinjury outcome measures include objective clinician-measured range of motion (ROM) and subjective patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), but the relationship between both has not been established. This study aimed to determine the relationship between shoulder ROM and PROMs and establish which ROMs correlated most with PROMs.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was conducted on patients with acute proximal humerus fractures. Surgical intervention, open or pathological fractures, neurovascular compromise, polytrauma, or delayed presentations were excluded. Correlation and regression analyses between active ROM and PROMs (Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand [QuickDASH] and Oxford Shoulder Score [OSS]) at 1-year postinjury were explored. ROM cutoffs predicting satisfactory PROM scores were established.

Results

Fifty-five patients were recruited. Moderate correlations were observed between PROMs and flexion, extension, and abduction, but not internal and external rotation. Multivariate analysis showed significant relationships between PROMs and flexion [QuickDASH: adjusted coefficient (AC): -0.135, P = .013, OSS: AC: 0.072, P = .002], abduction [QuickDASH: AC: -0.115, P = .021, OSS: AC: 0.059, P = .005], and extension [QuickDASH: AC: -0.304, P = .020] adjusting for age, gender, Neer classification, injury on dominant side, and employment. Achieving 130° flexion, 59° extension, and 124° abduction were correlated with satisfactory OSS/QuickDASH scores, respectively.

Conclusion

Overall, holistic assessment of outcomes with both subjective and objective outcomes are necessary, as shoulder flexion, extension, and abduction are only moderately correlated with PROMs. Attaining 130° flexion, 59° extension, and 124° abduction corresponded with satisfactory functional outcomes measured by OSS/QuickDASH and can guide rehabilitation.

Ingelsrud L, Roos EM, Silbernagel KG, Snyder-Mackler L, Risberg MA. Patient Acceptable Symptom State Thresholds for IKDC-SKF and KOOS at the 10-Year Follow-up After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: A Study From the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort

Background

Clinicians need thresholds for the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) and Treatment Failure to interpret group-based patient-reported outcome measures after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Validated thresholds that are crucial for accurately discerning patient symptom state and facilitating effective interpretation have not been determined for long-term follow-up after ACL injury.

Purpose

To calculate and validate thresholds for PASS and Treatment Failure for the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF) and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales at the 10-year follow-up after ACL injury.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A total of 163 participants with unilateral ACL injury (treated with reconstruction or rehabilitation alone) from the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort were included. Thresholds for PASS were calculated for IKDC-SKF and KOOS subscales using anchor-based predictive modeling and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Too few participants had self-reported Treatment Failure to calculate thresholds for that outcome. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to derive 95% CIs. The criterion validity of the predictive modeling and ROC-derived thresholds were assessed by comparing actual patient-reported PASS outcome with the calculated PASS outcome for each method of calculation and calculating their positive and negative predictive values with respect to the anchor questions.

Results

A total of 127 (78%) participants reported satisfactory symptom state. Predictive modeling PASS thresholds (95% CIs) were 76.2 points (72.1-79.4 points) for IKDC-SKF, 85.4 points (80.9-89.2 points) for KOOS Pain, 76.5 points (67.8-84.7 points) for KOOS Symptoms, 93.8 points (90.1-96.9 points) for KOOS activities of daily living, 71.6 points (63.4-77.7 points) for KOOS Sports, and 59.0 points (53.7-63.9 points) for KOOS quality of life (QoL). Predictive modeling thresholds classified 81% to 93% of the participants as having satisfactory symptom state, whereas ROC-derived thresholds classified >50% as unsatisfied. The thresholds for IKDC-SKF, KOOS Sports, and KOOS QoL resulted in the most accurate percentages of PASS among all identified thresholds and therefore demonstrate the highest validity.

Conclusion

Predictive modeling provided valid PASS thresholds for IKDC-SKF and KOOS at the 10-year follow-up after ACL injury. The thresholds for IKDC-SKF, KOOS Sports, and KOOS QoL should be used when determining satisfactory outcomes. ROC-derived thresholds result in substantial misclassification rates of the participants who reported satisfactory symptom state.

A first look at the reliability, validity and responsiveness of L-PF-35 dyspnea domain scores in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis

BACKGROUND

Dyspnea impairs quality of life (QOL) in patients with fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (FHP). The Living with Pulmonary Fibrosis questionnaire (L-PF) assesses symptoms, their impacts and PF-related QOL in patients with any form of PF. Its scores have not undergone validation analyses in an FHP cohort.

METHODS

We used data from the Pirfenidone in FHP trial to examine reliability, validity and responsiveness of the L-PF-35 Dyspnea domain score (Dyspnea) and to estimate its meaningful within-patient change (MWPC) threshold for worsening. Lack of suitable anchors precluded conducting analyses for other L-PF-35 scores.

RESULTS

At baseline, Dyspnea's internal consistency (Cronbach's coefficient alpha) was 0.85; there were significant correlations with all four anchors (University of California San Diego Shortness of Breath Questionnaire scores r = 0.81, St. George's Activity domain score r = 0.82, percent predicted forced vital capacity r = 0.37, and percent predicted diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide r = 0.37). Dyspnea was significantly different between anchor subgroups (e.g., lowest percent predicted forced vital capacity (FVC%) vs. highest, 33.5 ± 18.5 vs. 11.1 ± 9.8, p = 0.01). There were significant correlations between changes in Dyspnea and changes in anchor scores at all trial time points. Longitudinal models further confirmed responsiveness. The MWPC threshold estimate for worsening was 6.6 points (range 5-8).

CONCLUSION

The L-PF-35 Dyspnea domain appears to possess acceptable psychometric properties for assessing dyspnea in patients with FHP. Because instrument validation is never accomplished with one study, additional research is needed to build on the foundation these analyses provide.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The data for the analyses presented in this manuscript were generated in a trial registered on ClinicalTrials.gov; the identifier was NCT02958917.

Responsiveness and minimal important change of the Family Reported Outcome Measure (FROM-16)

BACKGROUND

The FROM-16 is a generic family quality of life (QoL) instrument that measures the QoL impact of patients' disease on their family members/partners. The study aimed to assess the responsiveness of FROM-16 to change and determine Minimal Important Change (MIC).

METHODS

Responsiveness and MIC for FROM-16 were assessed prospectively with patients and their family members recruited from outpatient departments of the University Hospital Wales and University Hospital Llandough, Cardiff, United Kingdom. Patients completed the EQ-5D-3L and a global severity question (GSQ) online at baseline and at 3-month follow-up. Family members completed FROM-16 at baseline and a Global Rating of Change (GRC) in addition to FROM-16 at follow-up. Responsiveness was assessed using the distribution-based (effect size-ES, standardized response mean -SRM) and anchor-based (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve ROC-AUC) approaches and by testing hypotheses on expected correlation strength between FROM-16 change score and patient assessment tools (GSQ and EQ-5D). Cohen's criteria were used for assessing ES. The AUC ≥ 0.7 was considered a good measure of responsiveness. MIC was calculated using anchor-based (ROC analysis and adjusted predictive modelling) and distribution methods based on standard deviation (SD) and standard error of the measurement (SEM).

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients with 15 different health conditions and their relatives completed baseline and follow-up questionnaires and were included in the responsiveness analysis. The mean FROM-16 change over 3 months = 1.43 (SD = 4.98). The mean patient EQ-5D change over 3 months = -0.059 (SD = 0.14). The responsiveness analysis showed that the FROM-16 was responsive to change (ES = 0.2, SRM = 0.3; p < 0.01). The ES and SRM of FROM-16 change score ranged from small (ES = 0.2; SRM = 0.3) for the distribution-based method to large (ES = 0.8, SRM = 0.85) for anchor-based methods. The AUC value was above 0.7, indicating good responsiveness. There was a significant positive correlation between the FROM-16 change scores and the patient's disease severity change scores (p < 0.001). The MIC analysis was based on data from 100 family members of 100 patients. The MIC value of 4 was suggested for FROM-16.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study confirm the longitudinal validity of FROM-16 which refers to the degree to which an instrument is able to measure change in the construct to be measured. The results yield a MIC value of 4 for FROM-16. These psychometric attributes of the FROM-16 instrument are useful in both clinical research as well as clinical practice.

Comprehensive quality assessment for aphasia rehabilitation after stroke: protocol for a multicentre, mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

People with aphasia following stroke experience disproportionally poor outcomes, yet there is no comprehensive approach to measuring the quality of aphasia services. The Meaningful Evaluation of Aphasia SeRvicES (MEASuRES) minimum dataset was developed in partnership with people with lived experience of aphasia, clinicians and researchers to address this gap. It comprises sociodemographic characteristics, quality indicators, treatment descriptors and outcome measurement instruments. We present a protocol to pilot the MEASuRES minimum dataset in clinical practice, describe the factors that hinder or support implementation and determine meaningful thresholds of clinical change for core outcome measurement instruments.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This research aims to deliver a comprehensive quality assessment toolkit for poststroke aphasia services in four studies. A multicentre pilot study (study 1) will test the administration of the MEASuRES minimum dataset within five Australian health services. An embedded mixed-methods process evaluation (study 2) will evaluate the performance of the minimum dataset and explore its clinical applicability. A consensus study (study 3) will establish consumer-informed thresholds of meaningful change on core aphasia outcome constructs, which will then be used to establish minimal important change values for corresponding core outcome measurement instruments (study 4).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Studies 1 and 2 have been registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12623001313628). Ethics approval has been obtained from the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital (HREC/2023/MNHB/95293) and The University of Queensland (2022/HE001946 and 2023/HE001175). Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and engagement with relevant stakeholders including healthcare providers, policy-makers, stroke and rehabilitation audit and clinical quality registry custodians, consumer support organisations, and individuals with aphasia and their families.

Responsiveness of the Various Short-Form Versions of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Between 2 and 5 Years After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Background

Various short-form versions of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) have been developed in an attempt to minimize responder burden. However, the responsiveness of these short-form measures in patients who have undergone anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has not been compared at midterm follow-up.

Purpose

To determine the responsiveness of 3 short-form versions of the KOOS (KOOS-12, KOOS-Global, and KOOS-ACL) in patients who have undergone ACL reconstruction.

Study Design

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

In 276 patients (149 male, 127 female), we administered the KOOS and a measure of overall knee function at both 2 and 5 years after ACL reconstruction. From the full KOOS, the following short-form versions were calculated: KOOS-12, KOOS-Global, and KOOS-ACL. Responsiveness was assessed using several distribution and anchor-based methods for each of the short-form versions. From distribution statistics the standardized response mean (SRM) and smallest detectable change (SDC) were calculated. Using the anchor-based method, the minimally important change (MIC) that was associated with an improvement in knee function was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

Results

High ceiling effects were present for all measures. KOOS-Global scores increased significantly over time, whereas KOOS-12 and KOOS-ACL did not change. The KOOS-Quality of Life (QOL) subscale, which can be derived from both KOOS-Global and KOOS-12, also increased significantly between assessments. Both these increases were associated with a small (0.2-0.3) SRM. The MIC was smallest for KOOS-Global (3.2 points) and largest for KOOS-QOL (9.4 points), and, for all measures, the MIC was larger than the SDC at a group level. KOOS-Global was the only measure for which the mean difference between the 2- and 5-year assessments exceeded both the SDC (group level) and the MIC.

Conclusion

Of the 3 short-form versions of the KOOS currently available, the KOOS-Global had the greatest responsiveness to change between the 2- and 5-year assessments after ACL reconstruction. High ceiling effects were present for all versions.

Machine Learning Models for Predicting Disability and Pain Following Lumbar Disc Herniation Surgery

Importance

Lumber disc herniation surgery can reduce pain and disability. However, a sizable minority of individuals experience minimal benefit, necessitating the development of accurate prediction models.

Objective

To develop and validate prediction models for disability and pain 12 months after lumbar disc herniation surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A prospective, multicenter, registry-based prognostic study was conducted on a cohort of individuals undergoing lumbar disc herniation surgery from January 1, 2007, to May 31, 2021. Patients in the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery from all public and private hospitals in Norway performing spine surgery were included. Data analysis was performed from January to June 2023.

Exposures

Microdiscectomy or open discectomy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Treatment success at 12 months, defined as improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) of 22 points or more; Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) back pain improvement of 2 or more points, and NRS leg pain improvement of 4 or more points. Machine learning models were trained for model development and internal-external cross-validation applied over geographic regions to validate the models. Model performance was assessed through discrimination (C statistic) and calibration (slope and intercept).

Results

Analysis included 22 707 surgical cases (21 161 patients) (ODI model) (mean [SD] age, 47.0 [14.0] years; 12 952 [57.0%] males). Treatment nonsuccess was experienced by 33% (ODI), 27% (NRS back pain), and 31% (NRS leg pain) of the patients. In internal-external cross-validation, the selected machine learning models showed consistent discrimination and calibration across all 5 regions. The C statistic ranged from 0.81 to 0.84 (pooled random-effects meta-analysis estimate, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.81-0.84) for the ODI model. Calibration slopes (point estimates, 0.94-1.03; pooled estimate, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.93-1.06) and calibration intercepts (point estimates, -0.05 to 0.11; pooled estimate, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.10) were also consistent across regions. For NRS back pain, the C statistic ranged from 0.75 to 0.80 (pooled estimate, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.75-0.79); for NRS leg pain, the C statistic ranged from 0.74 to 0.77 (pooled estimate, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.74-0.76). Only minor heterogeneity was found in calibration slopes and intercepts.

Conclusion

The findings of this study suggest that the models developed can inform patients and clinicians about individual prognosis and aid in surgical decision-making.

Reliability, Measurement Error, Responsiveness, and Minimal Important Change of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale 2.0 for Patients With Nonspecific Neck Pain

OBJECTIVE

The Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) is a patient-reported outcome measure used to assess functional limitations. Recently, the PSFS 2.0 was proposed; this instrument includes an inverse numeric rating scale and an additional list of activities that patients can choose. The aim of this study was to assess the test-retest reliability, measurement error, responsiveness, and minimal important change of the PSFS 2.0 when used by patients with nonspecific neck pain.

METHODS

Patients with nonspecific neck pain completed a numeric rating scale, the PSFS 2.0, and the Neck Disability Index at baseline and again after 12 weeks. The Global Perceived Effect (GPE) was also collected at 12 weeks and used as an anchor. Test-retest measurement was assessed by completion of a second PSFS 2.0 after 1 week. Measurement error was calculated using a Bland-Altman plot. The receiver operating characteristic method with the anchor (GPE) functions as the reference standard was used for calculating the minimal important change.

RESULTS

One hundred patients were included, with 5 lost at follow-up. No floor and ceiling effects were reported. In the test-retest analysis, the mean difference was 0.15 (4.70 at first test and 4.50 at second test). The ICC (mixed models) was 0.95, indicating high agreement (95% CI = 0.92-0.97). For measurement error, the upper and lower limits of agreement were 0.95 and -1.25 points, respectively, with a smallest detectable change of 1.10. The minimal important change was determined to be 2.67 points. The PSFS 2.0 showed satisfactory responsiveness, with an area under the curve of 0.82 (95% CI = 0.70-0.93). There were substantial to high correlations between the change scores of the PSFS 2.0 and the Neck Disability Index and GPE (0.60 and 0.52, respectively; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The PSFS 2.0 is a reliable and responsive patient-reported outcome measure for use by patients with neck pain.

Minimal important change and difference in health outcome: An overview of approaches, concepts, and methods

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of approaches, concepts, and methods used to define and assess minimal important change and difference in health outcome.

METHOD

A narrative review of the literature, guided by a conceptual framework.

RESULTS

We distinguish between (i) interpretation of health outcome in individuals versus groups, (ii) change within individuals or groups versus difference between change within individuals or groups; and (iii) the responder approach (based on the proportion of patients that obtain a defined response) versus the group average approach (based on the average amount of change in a group). We review approaches, concepts, and methods.

CONCLUSION

By bringing together and juxtaposing various approaches, concepts, and methods, we set a precursory step in the direction of consensus building in the field concerned with defining and assessing minimal important change and difference in health outcome. We emphasize the need for conceptual clarification and terminological standardization. We argue that assessing minimal importance of change and difference in health outcome is essentially a value judgment involving a range of considerations and perspectives.

Estimating anchor-based minimal important change using longitudinal confirmatory factor analysis

PURPOSE

The minimal important change (MIC) is defined as the smallest within-individual change in a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that patients on average perceive as important. We describe a method to estimate this value based on longitudinal confirmatory factor analysis (LCFA). The method is evaluated and compared with a recently published method based on longitudinal item response theory (LIRT) in simulated and real data. We also examined the effect of sample size on bias and precision of the estimate.

METHODS

We simulated 108 samples with various characteristics in which the true MIC was simulated as the mean of individual MICs, and estimated MICs based on LCFA and LIRT. Additionally, both MICs were estimated in existing PROMIS Pain Behavior data from 909 patients. In another set of 3888 simulated samples with sample sizes of 125, 250, 500, and 1000, we estimated LCFA-based MICs.

RESULTS

The MIC was equally well recovered with the LCFA-method as using the LIRT-method, but the LCFA analyses were more than 50 times faster. In the Pain Behavior data (with higher scores indicating more pain behavior), an LCFA-based MIC for improvement was estimated to be 2.85 points (on a simple sum scale ranging 14-42), whereas the LIRT-based MIC was estimated to be 2.60. The sample size simulations showed that smaller sample sizes decreased the precision of the LCFA-based MIC and increased the risk of model non-convergence.

CONCLUSION

The MIC can accurately be estimated using LCFA, but sample sizes need to be preferably greater than 125.

Verification of the minimal clinically important difference of the Capabilities of Upper Extremity Test in patients with subacute spinal cord injury

CONTEXT

The number of patients with cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) is increasing, and the Capabilities of Upper Extremity Test (CUE-T) is recommended for introduction in clinical trials. We calculated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the CUE-T using an adjustment model with an interval of 1 month.

DESIGN

This was a prospective study.

SETTING

This study was conducted with participants from the Chiba Rehabilitation Center in Japan.

PARTICIPANTS

The participants were patients with subacute CSCI.

INTERVENTIONS

The CUE-T and spinal cord independence measure (SCIM) III were performed twice within an interval of 1 month.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The MCID was calculated using an adjustment model based on logistic regression analysis. The participants were classified into an improvement group and a non-improvement group based on the amount of change in the two evaluations using the 10-point SCIM III MCID as an anchor.

RESULTS

There were 52 participants (56.8 ± 13.5 years old, 45 men/7 women) with complete or incomplete CSCI: 18 in the improvement group and 34 in the non-improvement group. A significant regression equation was obtained when calculating the MCID, and the total, hand, and side scores were 7.7, 2.0, and 3.7 points, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The calculated MCID of the CUE-T in this study was 7.7 points. The results of this study provide useful criteria for implementation in clinical trials. Future studies should use patient-reported outcomes, a more recommended anchor, and calculate the MCID using methods such as the patient's condition.

Minimal important change in the Berg Balance Scale in older women with vertebral compression fractures: A retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Vertebral compression fractures, which are commonly associated with older age and osteoporotic fractures, have an increased risk of re-fracture. Therefore, improving balance is important to prevent falls. The minimal important change (MIC) has been recommended for interpreting clinically meaningful changes in rating scales. The MIC of the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) for use in older women with vertebral compression fractures has not been established.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the MIC of the BBS that can be used in older women with vertebral compression fractures using predictive modeling methods and the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC)-based method.

DESIGN

A retrospective longitudinal multicenter study.

PATIENTS

Sixty older women (mean age ± standard deviation: 84.1 ± 7.0 years) with vertebral compression fractures who were unable to ambulate independently on a level surface.

METHODS

A change of one point in the Functional Ambulation Category (FAC) was used as an anchor to calculate the MIC of the BBS based on the change between admission and discharge. We calculated the MIC for the women whose FAC score improved by ≥1 point. We used three anchor-based methods to examine the MIC: the ROC-based method (MICROC ), the predictive modeling method (MICpred ), and the MICpred -based method adjusted by the rate of improvement and reliability of transition (MICadj ).

RESULTS

Thirty-nine women comprised the "important change" group based on their FAC score improvement. In this group, the MICROC (95% confidence interval [CI]) value of the BBS was 10.0 points (5.5-15.5), with an area under the curve of 0.71. The MICpred (95% CI) value was 9.7 (8.1-11.0), and the MICadj (95% CI) was 7.0 (5.5-8.5) points.

CONCLUSION

For women with vertebral compression fractures who are unable to ambulate independently, a 7.0-point improvement in the BBS score may be a useful indicator for reducing the amount of assistance required for walking.

Validity, reliability, responsiveness and interpretability of the Recap of atopic eczema (RECAP) questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Limited research has been conducted on the measurement properties of the Recap of atopic eczema (RECAP) questionnaire, particularly in relation to interpretability.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the validity, reliability, responsiveness and interpretability of the Dutch RECAP in adults with atopic dermatitis (AD).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study in a Dutch tertiary hospital, recruiting adults with AD between June 2021 and December 2022. Patients completed the RECAP questionnaire, reference instruments and anchor questions at the following three timepoints: baseline, after 1-3 days and after 4-12 weeks. Hypotheses testing was used to investigate single-score validity and change-score validity (responsiveness). To assess reliability, both standard error of measurement (SEMagreement) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICCagreement) were reported. To assess the interpretability of single scores, bands for eczema control were proposed. To investigate the interpretability of change scores, both smallest detectable change (SDC) and minimally important change (MIC) scores were determined. To estimate the MIC scores, four different anchor-based methods were employed: the mean change method, 95% limit cut-off point, receiver operating characteristic curve and predictive modelling.

RESULTS

In total, 200 participants were included (57.5% male sex, mean age 38.5 years). Of the a priori hypotheses, 82% (single-score validity) and 59% (responsiveness) were confirmed. Known-group analyses showed differences in the RECAP scores between patient groups based on disease severity and impairment of the quality of life. The SEMagreement was 1.17 points and the ICCagreement was 0.988. The final banding was as follows: 0-1 (completely controlled); 2-5 (mostly controlled); 6-11 (moderately controlled); 12-19 (a little controlled); 20-28 (not at all controlled). Moreover, a single cut-off point of ≥ 6 was determined to identify patients whose AD is not under control. The SDC was 3.2 points, and the MIC value from the predictive modelling was 3.9 points. Neither floor nor ceiling effects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The RECAP has good single-score validity, moderate responsiveness and excellent reliability. This study fills a gap in the interpretability of the RECAP. Our results indicate a threshold of ≥ 6 points to identify patients whose AD is 'not under control', while an improvement of ≥ 4 points represents a clinically important change. Given its endorsement by the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema initiatives, the results of this study support the integration of RECAP into both routine clinical practice and research settings.

From numbers to meaningful change: Minimal important change by using PROMIS in a cohort of fracture patients

INTRODUCTION

use of the Patient-Reported Outcomes measurement Information System (PROMIS®) is slowly increasing in patients with a fracture. Yet, minimal important change of PROMIS in patients with fractures has been addressed in a very limited number of studies. As the minimal important change (MIC) is important to interpret PROMIS-scores, the goal is to estimate the MIC for PROMIS physical function (PF), PROMIS pain interference (PI) and PROMIS ability to participate in social roles and activities (APSRA) in patients with a fracture. Secondly, the smallest detectable change was determined.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A longitudinal cohort study on patients ≥ 18 years receiving surgical or non-surgical care for fractures was conducted. Patients completed PROMIS PF V1.1, PROMIS PI V1.1 and PROMIS APSRA V2.0. For follow-up, patients completed three additional anchor questions evaluating patient-reported improvement on a seven point rating scale. The predictive modeling method was used to estimate the MIC value of all three PROMIS questionnaires.

RESULTS

Hundred patients with a mean age of 55.4 ± 12.6 years were included of which sixty (60%) were female. Seventy-two (72%) patients were recovering from a surgical procedure. PROMIS-CAT T-scores of all PROMIS measures showed significant correlations with their anchor questions. The predictive modeling method showed a MIC value of +2.4 (n = 98) for PROMIS PF, -2.9 (n = 96) for PROMIS PI and +3.2 (n = 91) for PROMIS APSRA.

CONCLUSION

By using the anchor based predictive modeling method, PROMIS MIC-values for improvement of respectively +2.4 points on a T-score metric for PROMIS-PF, -2.9 for PROMIS-PI and +3.2 for PROMIS APSRA give the impression of being meaningful to patients. These values can be used in clinical practice for managing patient expectations; to inform on treatment results; and to assess if patients experience significant change. This in order to encourage patient centered care.

Responsiveness and Minimal Important Change of the Arabic Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) in Patients with Upper Extremity Musculoskeletal Disorders

The aim of this study was to examine the responsiveness of the Arabic Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and to quantify its minimal important change (MIC) for improvement. People with upper extremity musculoskeletal problems who were receiving physical therapy were evaluated at baseline and again during a follow-up appointment, with a median time frame of 7 days between the two testing sessions (range of 6 to 72 days). The participants completed the Arabic DASH, Global Assessment of Function (GAF), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and Global Rating of Change Scale (GRC). The responsiveness of the Arabic DASH was assessed by examining the pre-specified hypotheses. The MIC for improvement was determined using the receiver operating characteristic method (MICROC) and the predictive modeling method (MICpred). As hypothesized, a change in the Arabic DASH demonstrated a significant positive correlation with changes in the GAF (r = 0.69), NPRS (r = 0.68) and GRC (r = 0.73). Consistent with our hypotheses, the DASH change scores could be used to differentiate between participants who improved and those who did not improve (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.87), and they showed a large magnitude of change (effect size = 1.53, standardized response mean = 1.42) in patients who improved. All the hypotheses specified a priori were supported by the results. The Arabic DASH MICROC and MICpred were estimated to be 14.22 and 14.85. The interaction between the DASH change and baseline score was not a significant predictor of status (improved vs. not improved) (p = 0.75), indicating that the DASH MIC was not baseline-dependent. The Arabic DASH demonstrated sufficient responsiveness, supporting the idea that the Arabic DASH is capable of detecting changes in upper extremity function over time. The value of the Arabic DASH MIC was similar when estimated using the predictive modeling and ROC methods, and the MIC was not dependent on baseline status.

A Matched Comparison of the Rates of Achieving the Minimal Clinically Important Difference Following Conversion and Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are often lower following conversion total hip arthroplasty (cTHA) compared to matched primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) controls. However, the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for any PROMs are yet to be analyzed for cTHA. This study aimed to (1) determine if patients undergoing cTHA achieve primary THA-specific 1-year PROM MCIDs at comparable rates to matched controls undergoing primary THA and (2) establish 1-year MCID values for specific PROMs following cTHA.

METHODS

A retrospective case-control study was conducted using 148 cases of cTHA which were matched 1:2 to 296 primary THA patients. Previously defined anchor values for 2 PROM measures in primary THA were used to compare cTHA to primary THA, while novel cTHA-specific MCID values for 2 PROMs were calculated through a distribution method. Predictors of achieving the MCID of PROMs were analyzed through multivariate logistic regressions.

RESULTS

Conversion THA was associated with decreased odds of achieving the primary THA-specific 1-year Hip dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement PROM (Odds Ratio: 0.319, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.182-0.560, P < .001) and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Short-Form-10a PROM (Odds Ratio: 0.531, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.313-0.900, P = .019) MCIDs in reference to matched primary THA patients. Less than 60% of cTHA patients achieved an MCID. The 1-year MCID of the Hip dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Short-Form-10a specific to cTHA were +10.71 and +4.68, respectively.

CONCLUSION

While cTHA is within the same diagnosis-related group as primary THA, patients undergoing cTHA have decreased odds of achieving 1-year MCIDs of primary THA-specific PROMs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Estimating cutpoints of gait speed and sit-to-stand test values for self-reported mobility limitations in a cohort of community-dwelling older adults from Singapore: comparing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis with adjusted predictive modelling

OBJECTIVES

Clinical interpretability of the gait speed and 5-times sit-to-stand (5-STS) tests is commonly established by comparing older adults with and without self-reported mobility limitations (SRML) on gait speed and 5-STS performance, and estimating clinical cutpoints for SRML using the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) method. Accumulating evidence, however, suggests that the adjusted predictive modeling (APM) method may be more appropriate to estimate these interpretational cutpoints. Thus, we aimed to compare, in community-dwelling older adults, gait speed and 5-STS cutpoints estimated using the ROC and APM methods.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This study analyzed data from 955 community-dwelling independently walking older adults (73%women) aged ≥60 years (mean, 68; range, 60-88).

METHODS

Participants completed the 10-metre gait speed and 5-STS tests. Participants were classified as having SRML if they responded "Yes" to either of the 2 questions regarding walking and stair climbing difficulty. Cutpoints for SRML and its component questions were estimated using ROC analysis with Youden criterion and the APM method.

RESULTS

The proportions of participants with self-reported walking difficulty, self-reported stair climbing difficulty, and SRML were 10%, 19%, and 22%, respectively. Gait speed and 5-STS time were moderately correlated with each other (r=-0.56) and with the self-reported measures (absolute r-values, 0.39-0.44). ROC-based gait speed cutpoints were 0.14 to 0.16 m/s greater than APM-based cutpoints (P < 0.05) whilst ROC-based 5-STS time cutpoints were 0.8 to 3.3 s lower than APM-based cutpoints (P < 0.05 for walking difficulty). Compared with ROC-based cutpoints, APM-based cutptoints were more precise and they varied monotonically with self-reported walking difficulty, self-reported stair climbing difficulty, and SRML.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

In a sample of 955 older adults, our findings of precise and biologically plausible gait speed and 5-STS cutpoints for SRML estimated using the APM method indicate that this promising method could potentially complement or even replace traditional ROC methods.

Interpretation threshold values for patient-reported outcomes in patients participating in a digitally delivered first-line treatment program for hip or knee osteoarthritis

Objective

Establish proportions of patients reporting important improvement, acceptable symptoms and treatment failure and define interpretation threshold values for pain, patient-reported function and quality-of-life after participating in digital first-line treatment including education and exercise for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

Observational study. Responses to the pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS, 0-10 best to worst), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score 12 (KOOS-12) and Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score 12 (HOOS-12, both 0-100 worst to best) were obtained for 4383 (2987) and 2041 (1264) participants with knee (hip) OA at 3 and 12 months post intervention. Threshold values for Minimal Important Change (MIC), Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) and Treatment Failure (TF) were estimated using anchor-based predictive modeling.

Results

70-85% reported an important improvement in pain, function and quality of life after 3 and 12 months follow-up. 42% (3 months) and 51% (12 months) considered their current state as satisfactory, whereas 2-4% considered treatment failed. MIC values were -1 (NRS) and 0-4 (KOOS/HOOS-12) across follow-ups and joint affected. PASS threshold value for NRS was 3, and 53-73 for the KOOS/HOOS-12 subscales Corresponding values for TF were 5 (NRS) and 34-55 (KOOS/HOOS-12). Patients with more severe pain at baseline had higher MIC scores and accepted poorer outcomes at follow-ups.

Conclusion

Threshold estimates aid in the interpretation of outcomes after first-line OA interventions assessed with NRS Pain and KOOS/HOOS-12. Baseline pain severity is important to consider when interpreting threshold values after first-line interventions in these patients.

Responsiveness of the Indonesian Versions of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport After Injury Score, the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form, and the Lysholm Score in Patients With ACL Injury

Background

The Indonesian versions of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI), International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form (IKDC), and the Lysholm scores are considered valid and reliable for Indonesian-speaking patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to determine the responsiveness of the ACL-RSI, IKDC, and Lysholm scores in an Indonesian-speaking population with ACL injury. It was hypothesized that they would have good responsiveness.

Study Design

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

Methods

Between March 1, 2021, and February 28, 2022, patients with an ACL injury at a single hospital in Indonesia were asked to complete the ACL-RSI, IKDC, and Lysholm scores before either reconstruction surgery or nonoperative treatment. At 6 months after treatment, the patients completed all 3 scores a second time, plus a global rating of change question. The distribution-based and the anchor-based methods were used to study responsiveness. For each scale, the standardized response mean, minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and minimal detectable change (MDC; at the group [MDCgr] and individual [MDCind] levels) for each scale were determined.

Results

Of 80 eligible patients, 75 (93.8%) completed the study. The standardized response means for the ACL-RSI, IKDC, and Lysholm scores were 1.59, 1.72, and 1.51, respectively, indicating good responsiveness. The MCIDs for the ACL-RSI, IKDC, and Lysholm scores were 6.8, 7.8, and 4.8, respectively; all MCIDs were larger than that of the MDCgr (1.1, 0.7, and 0.6, respectively). At the individual level, the MCID for the IKDC was larger than the MDCind (7.8 vs 5.8). However, the MCIDs for ACL-RSI and Lysholm scores were smaller than those of the MDCind (6.8 vs 10.9 and 4.8 vs 5.1, respectively).

Conclusion

The Indonesian ACL-RSI, IKDC, and Lysholm scores indicated good responsiveness and can be used in the follow-up of patients after ACL injury, especially at the group level. In individual patients, IKDC was found to be more efficient than the ACL-RSI or Lysholm scores for detecting clinically important changes over time after ACL treatment.

Patients in high- and low-revision hospitals have similar outcomes after primary knee arthroplasty: 1-year postoperative results from the Danish prospective multicenter cohort study, SPARK

PURPOSE

It is well-known that revision rates after primary knee arthroplasty vary widely. However, it is uncertain whether hospital revision rates are reliable indicators of general surgical quality as defined by patients. The SPARK study compared primary knee arthroplasty surgery at three high-volume hospitals whose revision rates differed for unknown reasons.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included primary knee arthroplasty patients (total, medial/lateral unicompartmental and patellofemoral) in two low-revision hospitals (Aarhus University Hospital and Aalborg University Hospital Farsø) and one high-revision hospital (Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev-Gentofte). Patients were followed from preoperatively (2016-17) to 1-year postoperatively with patient-reported outcome measures including Oxford Knee Score (OKS), EQ-5D-5L and Copenhagen Knee ROM (range of motion) Scale. The surgical outcomes were compared across hospitals for patients with comparable grades of radiographic knee osteoarthritis and preoperative OKS. Statistical comparisons (parametric and non-parametric) included all three hospitals.

RESULTS

97% of the 1452 patients who provided baseline data (89% of those included and 56% of those operated) responded postoperatively (90% at 1 year). Hospitals' utilization of unicompartmental knee arthroplasties differed (Aarhus 49%, Aalborg 14%, and Copenhagen 22%, p < 0.001). 28 patients had revision surgery during the first year (hospital independent, p = 0.1) and were subsequently excluded. 1-year OKS (39 ± 7) was independent of hospital (p = 0.1), even when adjusted for age, sex, Body Mass Index, baseline OKS and osteoarthritis grading. 15% of patients improved less than Minimal Important Change (8 OKS) (Aarhus 19%, Aalborg 13% and Copenhagen 14%, p = 0.051 unadjusted). Patients with comparable preoperative OKS or osteoarthritis grading had similar 1-year results across hospitals (OKS and willingness to repeat surgery, p ≥ 0.087) except for the 64 patients with Kellgren-Lawrence grade-4 (Aarhus 4-6 OKS points lower). 86% of patients were satisfied, and 92% were "willing to repeat surgery", independent of hospital (p ≥ 0.1). Hospital revision rates differences diminished during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in hospitals with a history of differing revision rates had comparable patient-reported outcomes 1 year after primary knee arthroplasty, supporting that surgical quality should not be evaluated by revision rates alone. Future studies should explore if revision rate variations may depend as much on revision thresholds and indications as on outcomes of primary surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II (Prospective cohort study).

Responsiveness and minimal important change of seven PROMIS computerized adaptive tests (CAT) in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) has the potential to harmonize the measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQL) across medical conditions. We evaluated responsiveness and minimal important change (MIC) of seven Dutch-Flemish PROMIS computerized adaptive tests (CAT) in Dutch patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS

CKD patients (eGFR < 30 ml/min.1.73m²) completed at baseline and after 6 months seven PROMIS CATs (assessing physical function, pain interference, fatigue, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, and ability to participate in social roles and activities), Short Form Health Survey 12 (SF-12), PROMIS Pain Intensity single item, Dialysis Symptom Index (DSI), and Global Rating Scales (GRS) of change. Responsiveness was assessed by testing predefined hypotheses about expected correlations among measures, area under the ROC Curve, and effect sizes. MIC was determined with predictive modelling.

RESULTS

207 patients were included; 186 (90%) completed the follow-up. Most results were in accordance with expectations (70-91% of hypotheses confirmed), with some exceptions for PROMIS Anxiety and Ability to Participate (60% and 42% of hypotheses confirmed, respectively). For PROMIS Anxiety and Depression correlations with the GRS were too low (0.04 and 0.20, respectively) to calculate a MIC. MIC values, representing minimal important deterioration, ranged from 0.4 to 2.5 T-score points for the other domains.

CONCLUSION

We found sufficient responsiveness of PROMIS CATs Physical Function, Fatigue, Sleep Disturbance, and Depression. The results for PROMIS CATs Pain Interference were almost sufficient, but some results for Anxiety and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities were not as expected. Reported MIC values should be interpreted with caution because most patients did not change.

Interpretation Threshold Values for the Oxford Hip Score in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty: Advancing Their Clinical Use

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures such as the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) can capture patient-centered perspectives on outcomes after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The OHS assesses hip pain and functional limitations, but defining interpretation threshold values for the OHS is warranted so that numerical OHS values can be translated into whether patients have experienced clinically meaningful changes. Therefore, we determined the minimal important change (MIC), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and treatment failure (TF) threshold values for the OHS at 12 and 24-month follow-up in patients undergoing THA.

METHODS

This cohort study used data from patients undergoing THA at 1 public hospital between July 2016 and April 2021. At 12 and 24 months postoperatively, patients provided responses for the OHS and for 3 anchor questions about whether they had experienced changes in hip pain and function, whether they considered their symptom state to be satisfactory, and if it was not satisfactory, whether they considered the treatment to have failed. The anchor-based adjusted predictive modeling method was used to determine interpretation threshold values. Baseline dependency was evaluated using a new item-split method. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to determine 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Complete data were obtained for 706 (69%) of 1,027 and 728 (66%) of 1,101 patients at 12 and 24 months postoperatively, respectively. These patients had a median age of 70 years, and 55% to 56% were female. Adjusted OHS MIC values were 6.3 (CI, 4.6 to 8.1) and 5.2 (CI, 3.6 to 6.7), adjusted OHS PASS values were 30.6 (CI, 29.0 to 32.2) and 30.5 (CI, 29.3 to 31.8), and adjusted OHS TF values were 25.5 (CI, 22.9 to 27.7) and 27.0 (CI, 25.2 to 28.8) at 12 and 24 months postoperatively, respectively. MIC values were 5.4 (CI, 2.1 to 9.1) and 5.0 (CI, 1.9 to 8.7) higher at 12 and 24 months, respectively, in patients with a more severe preoperative state.

CONCLUSIONS

The established interpretation threshold values advance the interpretation and clinical use of the OHS, and may prove especially beneficial for registry-based evaluations of treatment quality.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles thresholds for minimal important change and return to presymptom activity level in active soldiers with mid-portion Achilles tendinopathy

INTRODUCTION

Mid-portion Achilles tendinopathy (mid-AT) is common in soldiers, significantly impacting activity levels and operational readiness. Currently, Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) represents the gold standard to evaluate pain and function in mid-AT. Our objective was to estimate VISA-A thresholds for minimal important change (MIC) and patient-acceptable symptom state for return to the presymptom activity level (PASS-RTA), in soldiers treated with a conservative programme for mid-AT.

METHODS

A total of 40 soldiers (40 unilateral symptomatic Achilles tendons) were included in this prospective cohort study. Pain and function were evaluated using VISA-A. Self-perceived recovery was assessed with the Global Perceived Effect scale. The predictive modelling method (MIC-predict) was used to estimate MIC VISA-A post-treatment (after 26 weeks) and after 1 year of follow-up. The post-treatment PASS-RTA VISA-A was estimated using receiver operating characteristic statistics. The PASS-RTA was determined by calculating Youden's index value closest to 1.

RESULTS

The adjusted MIC-predict was 6.97 points (95% CI 4.18 to 9.76) after 26 weeks and 7.37 points (95% CI 4.58 to 10.2) after 1 year of follow-up post-treatment.The post-treatment PASS-RTA was 95.5 points (95% CI 92.2 to 97.8).

CONCLUSIONS

A VISA-A change score of 7 points, post-treatment and at 1 year of follow-up, can be considered a minimal within-person change over time, above which soldiers with mid-AT perceive themselves importantly changed. Soldiers consider their symptoms to be acceptable for return to their presymptom activity level at a post-treatment VISA-A score of 96 points or higher.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NL69527.028.19.

Responsiveness and Minimal Important Change of the PROMIS Pain Interference Item Bank in Patients Presented in Musculoskeletal Practice

We evaluated the responsiveness of the Patient Reported Outcome Information System Pain Interference item bank in patients with musculoskeletal pain by testing predefined hypotheses about the relationship between the change scores on the item bank, change scores on legacy instruments and Global Ratings of Change (GRoC), and we estimated Minimal Important Change (MIC). Patients answered the full Dutch-Flemish V1.1 item bank. From the responses we derived scores for the standard 8-item short form (SF8a) and a CAT-score was simulated. Correlations between the change scores on the item bank, GRoC and legacy instruments were calculated, together with Effect Sizes, Standardized Response Means, and Area Under the Curve. GRoC were used as an anchor for estimating the MIC with (adjusted) predictive modeling. Of 1,677 patients answering baseline questionnaires 960 completed follow-up questionnaires at 3 months. The item bank correlated moderately high with the GRoC (Spearman's rho 0.63) and with the legacy instruments (Pearson's R ranging from .45 to .68). It showed a high ES (.97) and Standardized Response Means (.71), and could distinguish well between improved and not improved patients based on the GRoC (Area Under the Curve .77). Comparable results were found for the derived SF8a and CAT-scores. The MIC was estimated to be 3.2 (CI 2.6-3.7) T-score points. PERSPECTIVE: Our study supports the responsiveness of the PROMIS-PI item bank in patients with musculoskeletal complaints. Almost all predefined hypotheses were met (94%). The PROMIS-PI item bank correlated well with several legacy instruments which supports generic use of the item bank. MIC for PROMIS-PI was estimated to be 3.2 T-score points.

Measurement properties of PROMIS short forms for pain and function in patients receiving knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

While there are a few studies on measurement properties of PROMIS short forms for pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis, nothing is known about the measurement properties in patients with knee arthroplasty. Therefore, this study examined the measurement properties of the German Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) short forms for pain intensity (PAIN), pain interference (PI) and physical function (PF) in knee arthroplasty patients.

METHODS

Short forms were collected from consecutive patients of our clinic's knee arthroplasty registry before and 12 months post-surgery. Oxford Knee Score (OKS) was the reference measure. A subsample completed the short forms twice to test reliability. Construct validity and responsiveness were assessed using scale-specific hypothesis testing. For reliability, Cronbach's alpha, intraclass correlation coefficients, and agreement using standard error of measurement (SEM_agr) were used. Agreement was used to determine standardised effect sizes and smallest detectable changes (SDC90). Individual-level minimal important change (MIC) was calculated using a method of adjusted prediction.

RESULTS

Of 213 eligible patients, 155 received questionnaires, 143 returned baseline questionnaires and 119, 12-month questionnaires. Correlations of short forms with OKS were large (│r│ ≥ 0.7) with slightly lower values for PAIN, and specifically for men. Cronbach's alpha values were ≥ 0.84 and intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ 0.90. SEM_agr were around 3.5 for PAIN and PI and 1.7 for PF. SDC90 were around 8 for PAIN and PI and 4 for PF. Follow-up showed a relevant ceiling effect for PF. Correlations with OKS change scores of around 0.5 to 0.6 were moderate. Adjusted MICs were 7.2 for PAIN, 3.5 for PI and 5.7 for PF.

CONCLUSION

Our results partly support the use of the investigated short forms for knee arthroplasty patients. The ability of PF to differentiate between patients with high perceived recovery is limited. Therefore, the advantages and disadvantages should be strongly considered within the context of the intended use.

Estimating meaningful thresholds for multi-item questionnaires using item response theory

PURPOSE

Meaningful thresholds are needed to interpret patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) results. This paper introduces a new method, based on item response theory (IRT), to estimate such thresholds. The performance of the method is examined in simulated datasets and two real datasets, and compared with other methods.

METHODS

The IRT method involves fitting an IRT model to the PROM items and an anchor item indicating the criterion state of interest. The difficulty parameter of the anchor item represents the meaningful threshold on the latent trait. The latent threshold is then linked to the corresponding expected PROM score. We simulated 4500 item response datasets to a 10-item PROM, and an anchor item. The datasets varied with respect to the mean and standard deviation of the latent trait, and the reliability of the anchor item. The real datasets consisted of a depression scale with a clinical depression diagnosis as anchor variable and a pain scale with a patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) question as anchor variable.

RESULTS

The new IRT method recovered the true thresholds accurately across the simulated datasets. The other methods, except one, produced biased threshold estimates if the state prevalence was smaller or greater than 0.5. The adjusted predictive modeling method matched the new IRT method (also in the real datasets) but showed some residual bias if the prevalence was smaller than 0.3 or greater than 0.7.

CONCLUSIONS

The new IRT method perfectly recovers meaningful (interpretational) thresholds for multi-item questionnaires, provided that the data satisfy the assumptions for IRT analysis.

Harmonising knee pain patient-reported outcomes: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) and individual participant data (IPD)

OBJECTIVE

In order to facilitate data pooling between studies, we explored harmonisation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in people with knee pain due to osteoarthritis or knee trauma, using the Patient Acceptable Symptom State scores (PASS) as a criterion.

METHODS

We undertook a systematic literature review (SLR) of PASS scores, and performed individual participant data (IPD) analysis of score distributions from concurrently completed PROM pairs. Numerical rating scales (NRS), visual analogue scales, KOOS and WOMAC pain questionnaires were standardised to 0 to 100 (worst) scales. Meta-regression explored associations of PASS. Bland Altman plots compared PROM scores within individuals using IPD from WebEx, KICK, MenTOR and NEKO studies.

RESULTS

SLR identified 18 studies reporting PASS in people with knee pain. Pooled standardised PASS was 27 (95% CI: 21 to 35; n = 6,339). PASS was statistically similar for each standardised PROM. Lower PASS was associated with lower baseline pain (β = 0.49, P = 0.01) and longer time from treatment initiation (Q = 6.35, P = 0.04). PASS scores were lowest in ligament rupture (12, 95% CI: 11 to 13), but similar between knee osteoarthritis (31, 95% CI: 26 to 36) and meniscal tear (27, 95% CI: 20 to 35). In IPD, standardised PROMs each revealed similar group mean scores, but scores within individuals diverged between PROMs (LoA between -7 to -38 and +25 to 52).

CONCLUSION

Different standardised PROMs give similar PASS thresholds in group data. PASS thresholds may be affected more by patient and treatment characteristics than between PROMs. However, different PROMs give divergent scores within individuals, possibly reflecting different experiences of pain.

How much is enough? Considering minimally important change in youth mental health outcomes

To make decisions in mental health care, service users, clinicians, and administrators need to make sense of research findings. Unfortunately, study results are often presented as raw questionnaire scores at different time points and regression coefficients, which are difficult to interpret with regards to their clinical meaning. Other commonly reported treatment outcome indicators in clinical trials or meta-analyses do not convey whether a given change score would make a noticeable difference to service users. There is an urgent need to improve the interpretability and relevance of outcome indicators in youth mental health (aged 12-24 years), in which shared decision making and person-centred care are cornerstones of an ongoing global transformation of care. In this Personal View, we make a case for considering minimally important change (MIC) as a meaningful, accessible, and user-centred outcome indicator. We discuss what the MIC represents, how it is calculated, and how it can be implemented in dialogues between clinician and researcher, and between youth and clinician. We outline how use of the MIC could enhance reporting in clinical trials, meta-analyses, clinical practice guidelines, and measurement-based care. Finally, we identify current methodological challenges around estimating the MIC and areas for future research. Efforts to select outcome domains and valid measurement instruments that resonate with youth, families, and clinicians have increased in the past 5 years. In this context, now is the time to define demarcations of changes in outcome scores that are clinically relevant, and meaningful to youth and families. Through the use of MIC, youth-centred outcome measurement, analysis, and reporting would support youth-centred therapeutic decision making.

How strong should my anchor be for estimating group and individual level meaningful change? A simulation study assessing anchor correlation strength and the impact of sample size, distribution of change scores and methodology on establishing a true meaningful change threshold

PURPOSE

Treatment benefit as assessed using clinical outcome assessments (COAs), is a key endpoint in many clinical trials at both the individual and group level. Anchor-based methods can aid interpretation of COA change scores beyond statistical significance, and help derive a meaningful change threshold (MCT). However, evidence-based guidance on the selection of appropriately related anchors is lacking.

METHODS

A simulation was conducted which varied sample size, change score variability and anchor correlation strength to assess the impact of these variables on recovering the simulated MCT for interpreting individual and group-level results. To assess MCTs derived at the individual-level (i.e. responder definitions; RDs), Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and Predictive Modelling (PM) analyses were conducted. To assess MCTs for interpreting change at the group-level, the mean change method was conducted.

RESULTS

Sample sizes, change score variability and magnitude of anchor correlation affected accuracy of the estimated MCT. For individual-level RDs, ROC curves were less accurate than PM methods at recovering the true MCT. For both methods, smaller samples led to higher variability in the returned MCT, but higher variability still using ROC. Anchors with weaker correlations with COA change scores had increased variability in the estimated MCT. An anchor correlation of around 0.50-0.60 identified a true MCT cut-point under certain conditions using ROC. However, anchor correlations as low as 0.30 were appropriate when using PM under certain conditions. For interpreting group-level results, the MCT derived using the mean change method was consistently underestimated regardless of the anchor correlation.

CONCLUSION

Sample size and change score variability influence the necessary anchor correlation strength when recovering individual-level RDs. Often, this needs to be higher than the commonly accepted threshold of 0.30. Stronger correlations than 0.30 are required when using the mean change method. Results can assist researchers selecting and assessing the quality of anchors.

The challenges inherent with anchor-based approaches to the interpretation of important change in clinical outcome assessments

PURPOSE

Anchor-based methods are group-level approaches used to derive clinical outcome assessment (COA) interpretation thresholds of meaningful within-patient change over time for understanding impacts of disease and treatment. The methods explore the associations between change in the targeted concept of the COA measure and the concept measured by the external anchor(s), typically a global rating, chosen as easier to interpret than the COA measure. While they are valued for providing plausible interpretation thresholds, group-level anchor-based methods pose a number of inherent theoretical and methodological conundrums for interpreting individual-level change.

METHODS

This investigation provides a critical appraisal of anchor-based methods for COA interpretation thresholds and details key biases in anchor-based methods that directly influences the magnitude of the interpretation threshold.

RESULTS

Five important research issues inherent with the use of anchor-based methods deserve attention: (1) global estimates of change are consistently biased toward the present state; (2) the use of static current state global measures, while not subject to artifacts of recall, may exacerbate the problem of estimating clinically meaningful change; (3) the specific anchor assessment response(s) that identify the meaningful change group usually involves an arbitrary judgment; (4) the calculated interpretation thresholds are sensitive to the proportion of patients who have improved; and (5) examination of anchor-based regression methods reveals that the correlation between the COA change scores and the anchor has a direct linear relationship to the magnitude of the interpretation threshold derived using an anchor-based approach; stronger correlations yielding larger interpretation thresholds.

CONCLUSIONS

While anchor-based methods are recognized for their utility in deriving interpretation thresholds for COAs, attention to the biases associated with estimation of the threshold using these methods is needed to progress in the development of standard-setting methodologies for COAs.

Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for common outcome instruments in patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture - analysis of the FISH randomised clinical trial data

Background

Two common ways of assessing the clinical relevance of treatment outcomes are the minimal important difference (MID) and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). The former represents the smallest change in the given outcome that makes people feel better, while the latter is the symptom level at which patients feel well.

Methods

We recruited 124 patients with a humeral shaft fracture to a randomised controlled trial comparing surgery to nonsurgical care. Outcome instruments included the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, the Constant-Murley score, and two numerical rating scales (NRS) for pain (at rest and on activities). A reduction in DASH and pain scores, and increase in the Constant-Murley score represents improvement. We used four methods (receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve, the mean difference of change, the mean change, and predictive modelling methods) to determine the MID, and two methods (the ROC and 75th percentile) for the PASS. As an anchor for the analyses, we assessed patients’ satisfaction regarding the injured arm using a 7-item Likert-scale.

Results

The change in the anchor question was strongly correlated with the change in DASH, moderately correlated with the change of the Constant-Murley score and pain on activities, and poorly correlated with the change in pain at rest (Spearman’s rho 0.51, -0.40, 0.36, and 0.15, respectively).

Depending on the method, the MID estimates for DASH ranged from -6.7 to -11.2, pain on activities from -0.5 to -1.3, and the Constant-Murley score from 6.3 to 13.5.

The ROC method provided reliable estimates for DASH (-6.7 points, Area Under Curve [AUC] 0.77), the Constant-Murley Score (7.6 points, AUC 0.71), and pain on activities (-0.5 points, AUC 0.68).

The PASS estimates were 14 and 10 for DASH, 2.5 and 2 for pain on activities, and 68 and 74 for the Constant-Murley score with the ROC and 75th percentile methods, respectively.

Conclusion

Our study provides credible estimates for the MID and PASS values of DASH, pain on activities and the Constant-Murley score, but not for pain at rest. The suggested cut-offs can be used in future studies and for assessing treatment success in patients with humeral shaft fracture.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01719887, first registration 01/11/2012.

Patient-reported outcome measures as an outcome variable in sports medicine research

Injury prevention and rehabilitation research often address variables that would be considered clinician-oriented outcomes, such as strength, range of motion, laxity, and return-to-sport. While clinician-oriented variables are helpful in describing the physiological recovery from injury, they neglect the patient perspective and aspects of patient-centered care. Variables that capture patient perspective are essential when considering the impact of injury and recovery on the lives of patients. The inclusion of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as dependent variables in sports medicine research, including injury prevention and rehabilitation research, provides a unique perspective regarding the patient's perception of their health status, the effectiveness of treatments, and other information that the patient deems important to their care. Over the last 20 years, there has been a significant increase in the use of PROMs in sports medicine research. The growing body of work gives opportunity to reflect on what has been done and to provide some ideas of how to strengthen the evidence moving forward. This mini-review will discuss ideas for the inclusion of PROMs in sports medicine research, with a focus on critical factors, gaps, and future directions in this area of research. Important elements of research with PROMs, including instrument selection, administration, and interpretation, will be discussed and areas for improvement, consideration, and standardization will be provided.

Minimal important change was on the lower spectrum of previous estimates and responsiveness was sufficient for core outcomes in chronic low back pain

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to estimate the minimal important change (MIC) and responsiveness of core patient reported outcome measures for chronic low back pain (LBP) and Modic changes.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

In the Antibiotics in Modic changes (AIM) trial we measured disability (RMDQ, ODI), LBP intensity (NRS) and health-related quality of life (EQ5D) electronically at baseline, three- and 12-month follow-up. MICs were estimated using Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) curve and Predictive modeling analyses against the global perceived effect. Credibility of the estimates was assessed by a standardized set of criteria. Responsiveness was assessed by a construct and criterion approach according to COSMIN guidelines.

RESULTS

The MIC estimates of RMDQ, ODI and NRS scores varied between a 15-40% reduction, depending on including "slightly improved" in the definition of MIC or not. The MIC estimates for EQ5D were lower. The credibility of the estimates was moderate. For responsiveness, five out of six hypotheses were confirmed and AUC was >0.7 for all PROMs.

CONCLUSION

When evaluated in a clinical trial of patients with chronic LBP and Modic changes, MIC thresholds for all PROMs were on the lower spectrum of previous estimates, varying depending on the definition of MIC. Responsiveness was sufficient.

Psychological Readiness to Return to Sport After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in the Adolescent Athlete

CONTEXT

Psychological readiness to return to sport has been shown to be associated with future play after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery but has not been extensively studied in adolescent athletes.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the psychometric properties of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI) scale in adolescent athletes at multiple time points after ACL reconstruction surgery and determine whether psychological readiness scores at 6 months predict return to competition sport at 12 months.

DESIGN

Case series.

SETTING

Private orthopaedic clinic.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

A total of 115 adolescent athletes (65 girls, 50 boys) 17 years and younger who had undergone primary unilateral ACL reconstruction.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The ACL-RSI scale was administered at 6 and 12 months after surgery, and return-to-sport status was also documented. Factor analysis was undertaken and predictive validity assessed using between-groups comparisons and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve statistics.

RESULTS

The ACL-RSI scores increased between 6 and 12 months (55 to 71; P < .001, effect size = 0.98). No floor or ceiling effects were present, and the scale had high internal consistency (Cronbach α at 6 months = 0.91 and at 12 months = 0.94). Principal component analysis showed that 2 factors were present: the first represented performance confidence and risk appraisal and the second, emotions. For the full-scale ACL-RSI, scores at 6 months had acceptable predictive ability for a return to play at 12 months (area under the ROC curve = 0.7, P = .03). When the 2 identified factors were analyzed separately, the emotions factor also had acceptable predictive ability (area under the ROC curve = 0.73, P = .009), but the confidence in performance and risk appraisal factors had poor predictive ability (area under the ROC curve = 0.59, P = .09).

CONCLUSIONS

Greater psychological readiness was associated with return to sport in adolescent athletes after ACL reconstruction, with the athletes' emotional response appearing to be more influential than their confidence in their performance or their appraisal of risk.

Meaningful thresholds for patient-reported outcomes following interventions for anterior cruciate ligament tear or traumatic meniscus injury: a systematic review for the OPTIKNEE consensus

OBJECTIVE

We synthesised and assessed credibility (ie, trustworthiness) of thresholds that define meaningful scores for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following interventions for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear or traumatic meniscus injury.

DESIGN

Systematic review, narrative synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched five databases, handsearched references of included studies and tracked citations.

ELIGIBILITY

Included studies investigated: individuals with ACL tear or meniscus injury; mean age <35 years; and PROM thresholds calculated using any method to define a minimal important change (MIC) or a meaningful post-treatment score (Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) or Treatment Failure).

RESULTS

We included 18 studies (15 ACL, 3 meniscus). Three different methods were used to calculate anchor-based MICs across 9 PROMs, PASS thresholds across 4 PROMs and treatment failure for 1 PROM. Credibility was rated 'high' for only one study-an MIC of 18 for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Quality-of-life (KOOS-QOL) subscale (using the MID Credibility Assessment Tool). Where multiple thresholds were calculated among 'low' credibility thresholds in ACL studies, MICs converged to within a 10-point range for KOOS-Symptoms (-1.2 to 5.4) and function in daily living (activities of daily living, ADL 0.5-8.1) subscales, and the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (7.1-16.2). Other PROM thresholds differed up to 30 points. PASS thresholds converged to within a 10-point range in KOOS-ADL for ACL tears (92.3-100), and KOOS-Symptoms (73-78) and KOOS-QOL (53-57) in meniscus injuries.

CONCLUSION

Meaningful PROM thresholds were highly susceptible to study heterogeneity. While PROM thresholds can aid interpretability in research and clinical practice, they should be cautiously interpreted.

Likely change indexes improve estimates of individual change on patient-reported outcomes

PURPOSE

Individual change on a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure can be assessed by statistical significance and meaningfulness to patients. We explored the relationship between these two criteria by varying the confidence levels of the coefficient of repeatability (CR) on the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (R) Physical Function (PF) 10a (PF10a) measure.

METHODS

In a sample of 1129 adult cancer patients, we estimated individual-change thresholds on the PF10a from baseline to 6 weeks later with the CR at 50%, 68%, and 95% confidence. We also assessed agreement with group- and individual-level thresholds from anchor-based methods [mean change and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve] using a PF-specific patient global impression of change (PGIC).

RESULTS

CRs at 50%, 68%, and 95% confidence were 3, 4, and 7 raw score points, respectively. The ROC- and mean-change-based thresholds for deterioration were -4 and -6; for improvement they were both 2. Kappas for agreement between anchor-based thresholds and CRs for deterioration ranged between κ = 0.65 and 1.00, while for improvement, they ranged between 0.35 and 0.83. Agreement between the PGIC and all CRs always fell below "good" (κ < 0.40) for deterioration (0.30-0.33) and were lower for improvement (0.16-0.28).

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison to the CR at 95% confidence, CRs at 50% and 68% confidence (considered likely change indexes) have the advantage of maximizing the proportion of patients appropriately classified as changed according to statistical significance and meaningfulness.

Establishing thresholds for meaningful within-individual change using longitudinal item response theory

Purpose

Thresholds for meaningful within-individual change (MWIC) are useful for interpreting patient-reported outcome measures (PROM). Transition ratings (TR) have been recommended as anchors to establish MWIC. Traditional statistical methods for analyzing MWIC such as mean change analysis, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and predictive modeling ignore problems of floor/ceiling effects and measurement error in the PROM scores and the TR item. We present a novel approach to MWIC estimation for multi-item scales using longitudinal item response theory (LIRT).

Methods

A Graded Response LIRT model for baseline and follow-up PROM data was expanded to include a TR item measuring latent change. The LIRT threshold parameter for the TR established the MWIC threshold on the latent metric, from which the observed PROM score MWIC threshold was estimated. We compared the LIRT approach and traditional methods using an example data set with baseline and three follow-up assessments differing by magnitude of score improvement, variance of score improvement, and baseline-follow-up score correlation.

Results

The LIRT model provided good fit to the data. LIRT estimates of observed PROM MWIC varied between 3 and 4 points score improvement. In contrast, results from traditional methods varied from 2 to 10 points—strongly associated with proportion of self-rated improvement. Best agreement between methods was seen when approximately 50% rated their health as improved.

Conclusion

Results from traditional analyses of anchor-based MWIC are impacted by study conditions. LIRT constitutes a promising and more robust analytic approach to identifying thresholds for MWIC.

The minimal important change for the EQ VAS based on the SF-36 health transition item: observations from 25772 spine surgery procedures

PURPOSE

The EQ VAS is an integral part of EQ-5D, a commonly used instrument for health-related quality of life assessment. This study aimed to calculate the minimal important change (MIC) thresholds for the EQ VAS for improvement and deterioration after surgery for disk herniation or spinal stenosis.

METHODS

Patients, who were surgically treated for disk herniation or spinal stenosis between 2007 and 2016, were recruited from the Swedish spine register. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative data for a total of 25772 procedures were available for analysis. We used two anchor-based methods to estimate MIC for EQ VAS: (1) a predictive model based on logistic regression and (2) receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. The SF-36 health transition item was used as anchor.

RESULTS

The EQ VAS MIC threshold for improvement after disk herniation surgery ranged from 8.25 to 11.8 while the corresponding value for deterioration ranged from - 6.17 to 0.5. For spinal stenosis surgery the corresponding MIC values ranged from 10.5 to 14.5 and - 7.16 to - 6.5 respectively. There were moderate negative correlations (disk herniation - 0.47, spinal stenosis - 0.46) between the 1 year change in the EQ VAS and the SF-36 health transition item (MIC anchor).

CONCLUSIONS

For EQ VAS, we recommend a MIC threshold of 12 points for improvement after surgery for disk herniation or spinal stenosis, whereas the corresponding threshold for deterioration is - 7 points. There are marked differences between the EQ VAS MIC for improvement and deterioration after surgery for disk herniation or spinal stenosis. The MIC value varied depending on the method used for MIC estimation.