Estimating the minimal clinically important difference for the Physical Component Summary of the Short Form 36 for patients with stroke.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To determine the Physical Component Summary (PCS) score's minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on the Short Form 36 (SF-36) for people with stroke.Methods
We conducted secondary analysis of data from a large randomized controlled trial (N = 400) in the post-hospital discharge phase of stroke rehabilitation with outcome measurement 6 and 12 months following stroke. Three methods were used for estimating the MCID: two anchor and one distribution. Method 1 compared SF-36 PCS scores at 12 months for responses to the SF-36's Perceived Health Change (PHC) question. Method 2 compared the change in PCS score between 6 and 12 months for responses to the PHC question. Method 3 used Cohen's method to estimate the MCID from the PCS score distribution.Results
Method 1: the mean PCS score increased by 3.0 units (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2-3.9) for each unit change in the PHC question. Method 2: the mean change in PCS score increased by 2.1 units (95% CI 1.4-2.8) for each unit change in the PHC question. Method 3: the MCID was estimated to be 1.8 units.Conclusions
Our estimate of the MCID for the PCS in patients with stroke was 1.8 to 3.0 units.
SUBMITTER: Fu V
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8724999 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6336372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA minimal clinically important difference has not been established for the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale in patients with tardive dyskinesia. Valbenazine is a vesicular monoamine transporter 2 inhibitor approved for the treatment of tardive dyskinesia in adults. Efficacy in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials was defined as the change from baseline in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale total score (sum of items 1-7).ObjectivesTo estimate an minimal clinically important difference for the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale using valbenazine trial data and an anchor-based method.MethodsData were pooled from three 6-week double-blind, placebo-controlled trials: KINECT (NCT01688037), KINECT 2 (NCT01733121), and KINECT 3 (NCT02274558). Valbenazine doses were pooled for analyses as follows: "low dose," which includes 40 or 50 mg/day; and "high dose," which includes 75 or 80 mg/day. Mean changes from baseline in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale total score were analyzed in all participants (valbenazine- and placebo-treated) with a Clinical Global Impression of Change-Tardive Dyskinesia or Patient Global Impression of Change score of 1 (very much improved) to 3 (minimally improved).ResultsThe least squares mean improvement from baseline to week 6 in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale total score was significantly greater with valbenazine (low dose: -2.4; high dose: -3.2; both, P < 0.001) versus placebo (-0.7). An minimal clinically important difference of 2 points was estimated based on least squares mean changes in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale total score in participants with a Clinical Global Impression of Change-Tardive Dyskinesia score ≤3 at week 6 (mean change: -2.2; median change: -2) or Patient Global Impression of Change score ≤3 at week 6 (mean change: -2.0; median change: -2).ConclusionsResults from an anchor-based method indicate that a 2-point decrease in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale total score may be considered clinically important. © 2019 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
| S-EPMC6772010 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Estimates of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for physical activity (PA) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are needed. The objective is to provide an anchor-based estimate of the MCID for daily step count. PA was promoted in persons with COPD using a pedometer (Omron HJ-720ITC) alone or a pedometer plus interactive website for 3 months. Participants wore the pedometer daily and received phone calls monthly to ascertain medical events. Medical events were counted when a participant self-reported that he/she had (1) worsening of breathing, (2) change to breathing medications, (3) medical care from an emergency room for any reason, or (4) hospitalization for any reason. Generalized linear regression models assessed daily step count as change at the end of study and averaged over the 15, 31, or 61 days centered on the event, in those with an event compared to those without one. All categories of events carried equal weight in the analyses. We studied 93 persons, 46 of whom had an event. Participants who experienced an event had a decrease of 1086 (95% confidence interval (CI): -2124 to -48) or 887 (95% CI: -2030 to 257) steps/day in the pedometer plus website or pedometer alone groups, respectively, compared to those without one. In the days centered on an event, participants who had an event experienced a decrease of 882-983 steps/day (pedometer plus website) or a decrease of 351-495 steps/day (pedometer alone), compared to those without one. The MCID for PA in COPD ranges from 350 steps/day to 1100 steps/day.
| S-EPMC6302974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pedometer step count improves with pulmonary rehabilitation and deteriorates with time. The MCID for improvement and deterioration is 427 and -456 steps, respectively, but there is uncertainty about the reliability of these estimates. https://bit.ly/3ci97Jh.
| S-EPMC7983253 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImpulse oscillometry (IOS) allows an effort-independent evaluation of small airway function in asthma. Unfortunately, well-determined minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for IOS measures are lacking. Here, we provide MCIDs for frequently used IOS measures, namely frequency dependence of resistance (FDR) and area of reactance (AX), in patients with asthma.MethodsWe performed IOS at baseline and 1 year later in adult patients with mild-to-severe asthma (n=235). In a two-step approach, we first applied a distribution-based method to statistically determine the MCID. Next, we validated the proposed MCID according to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), Asthma Control Questionnaire-7 (ACQ-7) and Asthma Control Test (ACT). We used multivariable analyses to investigate the proposed MCIDs as predictors for improvements in PROMs compared with the established MCID of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1).ResultsThe proposed MCID was a decline of ≥0.06 kPa·L-1·s-1 and ≥0.65 kPa·L-1 for FDR and AX, respectively. Patients who had changes beyond the MCIDs for both FDR and AX showed greater improvements in all PROMs than those who had not. The mean improvements in PROMs were beyond the established MCIDs for ACQ-7 and AQLQ, and approximated the MCID for ACT. Multivariable analyses demonstrated the MCIDs for both FDR and AX as independent predictors for the MCIDs of all PROMs. The MCID for FDR was a stronger predictor of all PROMs than the MCID for FEV1.ConclusionsThis study provides MCIDs for IOS-derived measures in adult patients with asthma and emphasises that small airway function is a distinguished end-point beyond the conventional measure of FEV1.
| S-EPMC10160799 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and Aims. The aim of the present study was to determine the estimates of minimal clinically important difference for Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale 2nd version (PDSS-2) total score and dimensions. Methods. The subject population consisted of 413 PD patients. At baseline, MDS-UPDRS, Hoehn-Yahr Scale, Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, and PDSS-2 were assessed. Nine months later the PDSS-2 was reevaluated with the Patient-Reported Global Impression Improvement Scale. Both anchor-based techniques (within patients' score change method and sensitivity- and specificity-based method by receiver operating characteristic analysis) and distribution-based approaches (effect size calculations) were utilized to determine the magnitude of minimal clinically important difference. Results. According to our results, any improvements larger than -3.44 points or worsening larger than 2.07 points can represent clinically important changes for the patients. These thresholds have the effect size of 0.21 and -0.21, respectively. Conclusions. Minimal clinically important differences are the smallest change of scores that are subjectively meaningful to patients. Studies using the PDSS-2 as outcome measure should utilize the threshold of -3.44 points for detecting improvement or the threshold of 2.07 points for observing worsening.
| S-EPMC4619979 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeTo determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for contact lens (CL)-related subjective responses and explore whether MCID values differ between subjective responses and study designs.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of data from seven one-week bilateral crossover studies and 14 one-day contralateral CL studies. For comfort, dryness, vision, or ease of insertion, participants rated on a 0-100 visual analogue scale (VAS) and indicated lens preference on a five-point Likert scale featuring strong, slight, and no preferences. For each criterion, four MCID estimates were calculated and averaged: mean VAS score difference for "slight preference," lower limit of 95% confidence interval VAS score difference for "slight preference," difference in mean VAS score difference between "slight" and "no preference" and 0.5 standard deviation of VAS scores.ResultsThe four calculation methods generated a small range of MCID values. For bilateral studies, the averaged MCID was 7.2 (range 5.4-8.8) for comfort, 8.1 (5.2-10.6) for dryness, 7.1 (5.5-9.3) for vision and 7.6 (6.0-10.5) for ease of insertion. For contralateral studies, the averaged MCID was 6.9 (6.1-7.6) for comfort at insertion and 7.5 (6.8-8.2) for end-of-day comfort.ConclusionsThis work demonstrated very similar MCID values across subjective responses and study designs, in a population of habitual soft CL wearers. In all cases, MCID values were on average seven units on a 0 to 100 VAS.Translational relevanceThis work provides MCID values which are important for interpreting ocular subjective responses and planning clinical studies.
| S-EPMC11343006 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOlfactory-specific quality of life (QOL) can be measured using the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders Negative Statements (QOD-NS). Changes in the QOD-NS after treatment can be difficult to interpret since there is no standardized definition of clinically meaningful improvement.MethodsPatients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) completed the QOD-NS. Four distribution-based methods were used to calculate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): (1) one-half standard deviation (SD); (2) standard error of the mean (SEM); (3) Cohen's effect size (d) of the smallest unit of change; and (4) minimal detectable change (MDC). We also averaged all 4 of the scores together. Finally, the likelihood of achieving a MCID after sinus surgery using these methods, as well as average QOD-NS scores, was stratified by normal vs abnormal baseline QOD-NS scores.ResultsOutcomes were examined on 128 patients. The mean ± SD improvement in QOD-NS score after surgery was 4.3 ± 11.0 for the entire cohort and 9.6 ± 12.9 for those with abnormal baseline scores (p < 0.001). The MCID values using the different techniques were: (1) SD = 6.5; (2) SEM = 3.1; (3) d = 2.6; and (4) MDC = 8.6. The MCID score was 5.2 on average. For the total cohort analysis, the likelihood of reporting a MCID ranged from 26% to 51%, and 49% to 70% for patients reporting preoperative abnormal olfaction.ConclusionDistribution-based MCID values of the QOD-NS range between 2.6 and 8.6 points, with an average of 5.2. When stratified by preoperative QOD-NS scores the majority of patients reporting abnormal preoperative QOD-NS scores achieved a MCID.
| S-EPMC6402812 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction and motivationMany health studies measure a continuous outcome and compare means between groups. Since means for biological data are often difficult to interpret clinically, it is common to dichotomise using a cut-point and present the 'percentage abnormal' alongside or in place of means. Examples include birthweight where 'abnormal' is defined as <2500 g (low birthweight), systolic blood pressure with abnormal defined as >140 mm Hg (high blood pressure) and lung function with varying definitions of the 'limit of normal'. In vulnerable populations with low means, for example, birthweight in a population of preterm babies, a given difference in means between two groups will represent a larger difference in the percentage with low birthweight than in a general population of babies where most will be full term. Thus, in general, the difference in percentage of patients with abnormal values for a given difference in means varies according to the reference population's mean value. This phenomenon leads to challenges in interpreting differences in means in vulnerable populations and in defining an outcome-specific minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in means since the proportion abnormal, which is useful in interpreting means, is not constant-it varies with the population mean. This has relevance for study power calculations and data analyses in vulnerable populations where a small observed difference in means may be difficult to interpret clinically and may be disregarded, even if associated with a relatively large difference in percentage abnormal which is clinically relevant.MethodsTo address these issues, we suggest both difference in means and difference in percentage (proportion) abnormal are considered when choosing the MCID, and that both means and percentages abnormal are reported when analysing the data.ConclusionsWe describe a distributional approach to analyse proportions classified as abnormal that avoids the usual loss of precision and power associated with dichotomisation.
| S-EPMC8578978 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Patient-reported outcome scales determine response to treatment. The minimal clinically important difference of these scales is a measure of responsiveness: the smallest change in a score associated with a clinically important change to the patient. This study sought to summarize the literature on minimal clinically important difference for the most commonly reported shoulder outcome scales. DESIGN:A literature search of PubMed and EMBASE databases identified 193 citations, 27 of which met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. RESULTS:For rotator cuff tears, a minimal clinically important difference range of 9-26.9 was reported for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, 8 or 10 for Constant, and 282.6-588.7 for the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index. For patients who underwent arthroplasty, a minimal clinically important difference range of 6.3-20.9 was reported for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, 5.7-9.4 for Constant, and 14.1-20.6 for the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index. For proximal humeral fractures, a minimal clinically important difference range of 5.4-11.6 was reported for Constant and 8.1-13.0 for Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand. CONCLUSIONS:A wide range of minimal clinically important difference values was reported for each patient population and instrument. In the future, a uniform outcome instrument and minimal clinically important difference will be useful to measure clinically meaningful change across practices and the spectrum of shoulder diagnoses.
| S-EPMC6649681 | biostudies-literature