Establishing minimal clinically important difference for the UCLA and ASES scores after rotator cuff repair

被引:29
|
作者
Malavolta, Eduardo A. [1 ]
Yamamoto, Gustavo J. [1 ]
Bussius, Daniel T. [1 ]
Assuncao, Jorge H. [1 ]
Andrade-Silva, Fernando B. [1 ]
Gracitelli, Mauro E. C. [1 ]
Ferreira Neto, Arnaldo A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sao Paulo, Orthoped & Traumatol Dept, Med Sch, Rua Capote Valente 361,Apto 212, BR-05409001 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
关键词
Minimal clinically important difference (MCID); Anchor-based methods; Distribution methods; University of California at Los Angeles; Shoulder Rating Scale; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons; Assessment Form; AMERICAN SHOULDER; ELBOW SURGEONS; RELIABILITY; VALIDITY; OUTCOMES; INDEX;
D O I
10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102894
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background/Hypothesis: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is a vital tool in the analysis of clinical results. It allows the determination of clinical relevance of statistical data. Our hypothesis was that specific differences between preoperative and postoperative scores would be able to accurately predict patient perception of improvement and satisfaction as reflected by anchor and distribution-based questions. Methods: Retrospective cohort with patients that underwent rotator cuff repair. We evaluated the University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale (UCLA) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Assessment Form (ASES) before and 12-months after surgery. Anchor-based, distribution-based and minimum detectable change (MDC) approaches were utilized. Results: We evaluated 289 shoulders. The MCID for the UCLA scale was 4.5 points using the anchor method, 2.5 by the distribution method and 3.6 by MDC. Patients with a baseline score > 20 presented a lower MCID (1.5, 1.1 and 1.7, respectively). For the ASES score, the MCID was 6.1 by the anchor method, 10.5 based on the distribution method and 26.3 by MDC. In the group of patients above the 60 point cutoff, the obtained values were 2.4, 4.9 and 13.6, respectively. Conclusion: The mean MCID value for the UCLA shoulder score is 3.5 points, ranging from 2.5 points (distribution method) to 4.5 points (anchor method). The mean MCID value for the ASES score was 15.2 points, ranging from 6.1 (anchor method) to 26.3 (MDC). Patients groups presenting with higher preoperative scores showed lower MCID values. This fact needs to be considered in postoperative comparisons between treatment groups. Level of evidence: Basic Science Study, Validation of Outcomes Instruments/Classification Systems. (c) 2021 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Time required to achieve the minimal clinically important difference after open proximal hamstring repair
    White, Alexander E.
    Varady, Nathan H.
    Itthipanichpong, Thun
    Menta, Samarth, V
    Ranawat, Anil S.
    JOURNAL OF HIP PRESERVATION SURGERY, 2025,
  • [32] Investigating the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for AzBio and CNC Speech Recognition Scores
    Patro, Ankita
    Moberly, Aaron C.
    Freeman, Michael H.
    Perkins, Elizabeth L.
    Jan, Taha A.
    Tawfik, Kareem O.
    O'Malley, Matthew R.
    Bennett, Marc L.
    Gifford, Rene H.
    Haynes, David S.
    Chowdhury, Naweed I.
    OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2024, 45 (09) : e639 - e643
  • [33] Comparative Effectiveness of Cartilage Repair With Respect to the Minimal Clinically Important Difference
    Jones, Kristofer J.
    Kelley, Benjamin, V
    Arshi, Armin
    McAllister, David R.
    Fabricant, Peter D.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2019, 47 (13): : 3284 - 3293
  • [34] Relationship Between Rotator Cuff Strength & Functional Scores After Bankart Repair
    Park, Geon
    Park, Wonhah
    Kim, Dokyung
    Gupta, Abhishek
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2018, 50 (05): : 680 - 680
  • [35] Minimal clinically important difference: The basics
    Salas Apaza, Julieta Aldana
    Ariel Franco, Juan Victor
    Meza, Nicolas
    Madrid, Eva
    Loezar, Cristobal
    Garegnani, Luis
    MEDWAVE, 2021, 21 (03):
  • [36] The Minimal Clinically Important Difference: Response
    Franceschini, Marco
    Boffa, Angelo
    Pignotti, Elettra
    Andriolo, Luca
    Zaffagnini, Stefano
    Filardo, Giuseppe
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2023, 51 (13): : NP52 - NP52
  • [37] Establishing the minimal clinically important difference for the PROMIS Physical domains in cervical deformity patients
    Passias, Peter G.
    Pierce, Katherine E.
    Williamson, Tyler
    Naessig, Sara
    Ahmad, Waleed
    Passfall, Lara
    Krol, Oscar
    Kummer, Nicholas A.
    Joujon-Roche, Rachel
    Moattari, Kevin
    Tretiakov, Peter
    Imbo, Bailey
    Maglaras, Constance
    O'Connell, Brooke K.
    Diebo, Bassel G.
    Lafage, Renaud
    Lafage, Virginie
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2022, 96 : 19 - 24
  • [38] Infection after rotator cuff repair
    Settecerri, JJ
    Pitner, MA
    Rock, MG
    Hanssen, AD
    Cofield, RH
    JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 1999, 8 (01) : 1 - 5
  • [39] Preoperative Outcome Scores Are Predictive of Achieving the Minimal Clinically Important Difference After Arthroscopic Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement
    Nwachukwu, Benedict U.
    Fields, Kara
    Chang, Brenda
    Nawabi, Danyal H.
    Kelly, Bryan T.
    Ranawat, Anil S.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2017, 45 (03): : 612 - 619
  • [40] Pain after rotator cuff repair
    Roberson, Troy
    Throckmorton, Thomas
    CURRENT ORTHOPAEDIC PRACTICE, 2016, 27 (02): : 156 - 160