Defining a Minimum Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Lumbar Tubular Microdecompression Patients

被引:6
|
作者
Vanhorn, Trent A. [1 ]
Knio, Ziyad O. [1 ]
O'Gara, Tadhg J. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Wake Forest Sch Med, Dept Orthopaed Surg, 1 Med Ctr Blvd, Winston Salem, NC 27157 USA
[2] Wake Forest Sch Med, Dept Neurosurg, Winston Salem, NC 27101 USA
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPINE SURGERY | 2020年 / 14卷 / 04期
关键词
Oswestry Disability Index; EQ-5D; health state; patient-reported outcome measures; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; LEG-PAIN-SCORES; BACK;
D O I
10.14444/7071
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are critical tools used in the assessment and reporting of surgical outcomes. However, significant differences in PROM scores have not been shown to consistently correlate with clinical improvement from the physician or patient perspective. Defining a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for PROMs offers interpretation of surgical outcomes with an emphasis on patient-centered feedback. The goal of this study was to define a MCID for the following PROMs in lumbar tubular microdecompression (LTMD) patients: the EuroQol-Five Dimensions (EQ-5D) index, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), leg pain visual analog scale (VAS), and low back pain VAS. Methods: This study examined 235 index LTMD patients with PROMs collected at preoperative evaluation and 1-year follow-up. Using an anchor-based approach with patient satisfaction index, a receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to define a MCID in the EQ-51) index, ODI, leg pain VAS, and low back pain VAS. Results: The patients had a mean age of 65.18 +/- 12.81 years, and 47.7% were male. The MCID values for the EQ5D. ODI. leg pain VAS, and low back pain VAS are 0.219, 15.0-16.5, 0.5, and 2.5-3.5, respectively. Conclusions: This study helps define a MCID for the EQ-5D index in LTMD patients. Given its ease of administration and economic relevance, further characterization of the EQ-5D index may warrant its use as a potential alternative or adjunct to the routinely collected PROMs following spine surgery.
引用
收藏
页码:538 / 543
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] The minimal important difference of patient-reported outcome measures related to female urinary incontinence: a systematic review
    Jordana Barbosa-Silva
    Letícia Bojikian Calixtre
    Daniela Von Piekartz
    Patricia Driusso
    Susan Armijo-Olivo
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 24
  • [42] Minimal clinically important difference of commonly used patient-reported outcome measures in total knee arthroplasty: review of terminologies, methods and proposed values
    Maredupaka, Siddhartha
    Meshram, Prashant
    Chatte, Manish
    Kim, Woo Hyun
    Kim, Tae Kyun
    KNEE SURGERY & RELATED RESEARCH, 2020, 32 (01)
  • [43] Minimal clinically important difference of commonly used patient-reported outcome measures in total knee arthroplasty: review of terminologies, methods and proposed values
    Siddhartha Maredupaka
    Prashant Meshram
    Manish Chatte
    Woo Hyun Kim
    Tae Kyun Kim
    Knee Surgery & Related Research, 32
  • [44] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Help Patients With Cancer
    Hassett, Michael J.
    Cronin, Christine
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2024, 7 (08)
  • [45] Patient-Reported Outcome Surveys for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Demonstrate Strong Correlations, High Minimum Clinically Important Difference Agreement and Large Ceiling Effects
    Hartwell, Matthew J.
    Soriano, Kylen K. J.
    Nguyen, Thu Quynh
    Monroe, Emily J.
    Wong, Stephanie E.
    Zhang, Alan L.
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2022, 38 (10): : 2829 - 2836
  • [46] The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Leg Pain on Patient-Reported Outcomes, Minimum Clinically Important Difference Achievement, and Patient Satisfaction After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Jacob, Kevin C.
    Patel, Madhav R.
    Collins, Andrew P.
    Parsons, Alexander W.
    Prabhu, Michael C.
    Vanjani, Nisheka N.
    Pawlowski, Hanna
    Singh, Kern
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2022, 167 : E1196 - E1207
  • [47] Patient-reported outcome measures in MS: Do development processes and patient involvement support valid quantification of clinically important variables?
    Bharadia, Trishna
    Vandercappellen, Jo
    Chitnis, Tanuja
    Eelen, Piet
    Bauer, Birgit
    Brichetto, Giampaolo
    Lloyd, Andrew
    Schmidt, Hollie
    King, Miriam
    Fitzgerald, Jennifer
    Hach, Thomas
    Hobart, Jeremy
    MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL-EXPERIMENTAL TRANSLATIONAL AND CLINICAL, 2022, 8 (02)
  • [48] Patient-reported experience with patient-reported outcome measures in adult patients seen in rheumatology clinics
    Lapin, Brittany R.
    Honomichl, Ryan
    Thompson, Nicolas
    Rose, Susannah
    Abelson, Abby
    Deal, Chad
    Katzan, Irene L.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2021, 30 (04) : 1073 - 1082
  • [49] Patient-reported experience with patient-reported outcome measures in adult patients seen in rheumatology clinics
    Brittany R. Lapin
    Ryan Honomichl
    Nicolas Thompson
    Susannah Rose
    Abby Abelson
    Chad Deal
    Irene L. Katzan
    Quality of Life Research, 2021, 30 : 1073 - 1082
  • [50] Patient-Reported Outcomes (Pros) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (Proms)
    Weldring, Theresa
    Smith, Sheree M. S.
    HEALTH SERVICES INSIGHTS, 2013, 6 : 61 - 68