Dataset Information

Evaluation of Clinically Meaningful Changes in Measures of Frailty.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To determine the clinically meaningful changes and responsiveness of widely used frailty measures.

Methods

We analyzed data from a prospective cohort study of 1,135 community-dwelling older adults who underwent assessments of frailty and health-related quality of life using the EuroQol-5D at baseline and 1 year later. Frailty measures included deficit-accumulation frailty index (FI); frailty phenotype; Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness, and Loss of Weight scale; and the Study of Osteoporotic Fracture (SOF) index. We determined the clinically meaningful changes by the distribution-based method and the anchor-based method using the EuroQol-5D score and responsiveness indices.

Results

Frailty measures were available in 925 participants at 1 year (81.5%). Based on the distribution-based method, small and large clinically meaningful changes were 0.019 and 0.057 for FI, 0.249 and 0.623 for frailty phenotype, 0.235 and 0.587 for FRAIL scale, and 0.116 and 0.289 for SOF index, respectively. The anchor-based estimates of small and large changes were 0.028 and 0.076 for FI, 0.097 and 0.607 for frailty phenotype, 0.269 and 0.368 for FRAIL scale, and 0.023 and 0.287 for SOF index, respectively. Based on the responsiveness index, per-group sample sizes to achieve 80% power in clinical trials, ranged from 51 (FI) to 7,272 (SOF index) for a small change and 9 (FI) to 133 (FRAIL scale) for a large change.

Conclusions

The estimates of clinically meaningful change of frailty measures can inform the choice of frailty measures to track longitudinal changes of frailty in clinical trials and clinical care of community-dwelling older adults.

SUBMITTER: Jang IY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7243580 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of Clinically Meaningful Changes in Measures of Frailty.

Jang Il-Young IY Jung Hee-Won HW Lee Hea Yon HY Park Hyungchul H Lee Eunju E Kim Dae Hyun DH

The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences 20200501 6

<h4>Background</h4>To determine the clinically meaningful changes and responsiveness of widely used frailty measures.<h4>Methods</h4>We analyzed data from a prospective cohort study of 1,135 community-dwelling older adults who underwent assessments of frailty and health-related quality of life using the EuroQol-5D at baseline and 1 year later. Frailty measures included deficit-accumulation frailty index (FI); frailty phenotype; Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness, and Loss of Weight scale; ...[more]

PMID: 32145016

Similar Datasets

Project description:A dataset range of isocenter congruency verification tests have been examined from a statistical perspective for the purpose of establishing tolerance levels that are meaningful, based on the fundamental limitation of linear accelerator isocentricity and the demands of a high-precision stereotactic radiosurgery program. Using a laser-defined isocenter, a total of 149 individual isocenter congruency tests were examined with recorded values for ideal spatial corrections to the isocenter test tool. These spatial corrections were determined from radiation exposures recorded on an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) at various gantry, collimator, and treatment couch combinations. The limitations of establishing an ideal isocenter were quantified from each variable which contributed to uncertainty in isocenter definition. Individual contributors to uncertainty, specifically, daily positioning setup errors, gantry sag, multileaf collimator (MLC) offset, and couch walkout, were isolated from isocenter congruency measurements to determine a clinically meaningful isocenter measurement. Variations in positioning of the test tool constituted, on average, 0.38 mm magnitude of correction. Gantry sag and MLC offset contributed 0.4 and 0.16 mm, respectively. Couch walkout had an average degrading effect to isocenter of 0.72 mm. Considering the magnitude of uncertainty contributed by each uncertainty variable and the nature of their combination, an appropriate schedule action and immediate action level were determined for use in analyzing daily isocenter congruency test results in a stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) program. The recommendations of this study for this linear accelerator include a schedule action level of 1.25 mm and an immediate action level of 1.50mm, requiring prompt correction response from clinical medical physicists before SRS or stereotactic body radiosurgery (SBRT) is administered. These absolute values were derived from considering relative data from a specific linear accelerator and, therefore, represent a means by which a numerical quantity can be used as a test threshold with relative specificity to a particular linear accelerator.

Project description:IntroductionOutcome measurement instruments (OMIs) are used to gauge the effects of treatment. In post-stroke aphasia rehabilitation, benchmarks for meaningful change are needed to support the interpretation of patient outcomes. This study is part of a research programme to establish minimal important change (MIC) values (the smallest change above which patients perceive themselves as importantly changed) for core OMIs. As a first step in this process, the views of people with aphasia and clinicians were explored, and consensus was sought on a threshold for clinically meaningful change.MethodsSequential mixed-methods design was employed. Participants included people with post-stroke aphasia and speech pathologists. People with aphasia were purposively sampled based on time post-stroke, age and gender, whereas speech pathologists were sampled according to their work setting (hospital or community). Each participant attended a focus group followed by a consensus workshop with a survey component. Within the focus groups, experiences and methods for measuring meaningful change during aphasia recovery were explored. Qualitative data were transcribed and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. In the consensus workshop, participants voted on thresholds for meaningful change in core outcome constructs of language, communication, emotional well-being and quality of life, using a six-point rating scale (much worse, slightly worse, no change, slightly improved, much improved and completely recovered). Consensus was defined a priori as 70% agreement. Voting results were reported using descriptive statistics.ResultsFive people with aphasia (n = 4, > 6 months after stroke; n = 5, < 65 years; n = 3, males) and eight speech pathologists (n = 4, hospital setting; n = 4, community setting) participated in one of four focus groups (duration: 92-112 min). Four themes were identified describing meaningful change as follows: (1) different for every single person; (2) small continuous improvements; (3) measured by progress towards personally relevant goals; and (4) influenced by personal factors. 'Slightly improved' was agreed as the threshold of MIC on the anchor-rating scale (75%-92%) within 6 months of stroke, whereas after 6 months there was a trend towards supporting 'much improved' (36%-66%).ConclusionOur mixed-methods research with people with aphasia and speech pathologists provides novel evidence to inform the definition of MIC in aphasia rehabilitation. Future research will aim to establish MIC values for core OMIs.Patient or public contributionThis work is the result of engagement between people with lived experience of post-stroke aphasia, including people with aphasia, family members, clinicians and researchers. Engagement across the research cycle was sought to ensure that the research tasks were acceptable and easily understood by participants and that the outcomes of the study were relevant to the aphasia community. This engagement included the co-development of a plain English summary of the results. Advisors were remunerated in accordance with Health Consumers Queensland guidelines. Interview guides for clinicians were piloted by speech pathologists working in aphasia rehabilitation.

Project description:Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a public health crisis. Differences in opioid withdrawal severity that predict treatment outcome could facilitate the process of matching patients to treatments. This is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that enrolled treatment seeking heroin-users (N = 89, males = 78) into a residential study. Participants maintained on morphine (30 mg, subcutaneous, four-times daily) underwent a naloxone (0.4 mg, IM = intramuscular) challenge session to precipitate withdrawal. Area-under-the-curve (AUC) values from self-reported withdrawal ratings during the challenge session were analyzed using K-means clustering, revealing two phenotype groups. Withdrawal and retention from the subsequent 14-day double-blind, double-dummy RCT comparing three study medications (clonidine, tramadol-ER, and buprenorphine) were evaluated as a function of phenotype. Cluster analyses suggested HIGH (N = 37; mean [SD] subjective opiate withdrawal scale [SOWS]-AUC 123.7 [65.8]) and LOW (N = 52; SOWS-AUC 68.0 [47.7]) withdrawal phenotype groups. HIGH participants were significantly more female and had lower body mass indices than LOW participants; no drug-use variables were significant. Regarding RCT outcomes, HIGH phenotype participants were less likely to be retained in the study (P = 0.02) and had higher mean self-reported withdrawal (P = 0.05) than LOW phenotype participants. A significant interaction in RCT retention was observed between phenotype (P = 0.02) and study medication (P < 0.01). Self-reported withdrawal was significant for phenotype (P = 0.02); study medication trended towards significance (P = 0.07). Results suggest patients have meaningfully different experiences of opioid withdrawal that may predict differential response to opioid pharmacotherapies during supervised withdrawal. Additional prospective research to replicate and more thoroughly evaluate withdrawal phenotype correlates and sex differences is warranted.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of Clinically Meaningful Changes in Measures of Frailty.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Evaluation of Clinically Meaningful Changes in Measures of Frailty.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets