Establishing Thresholds for Minimal Clinically Important Differences for the Peripheral Artery Disease Questionnaire

被引:6
|
作者
Peri-Okonny, Poghni A. [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Jingyan [2 ]
Gosch, Kensey L.
Patel, Manesh R. [3 ]
Shishehbor, Mehdi H. [4 ,5 ]
Safley, David L. [2 ]
Abbott, J. Dawn [1 ,6 ]
Aronow, Herbert D. [6 ]
Mena-Hurtado, Carlos [7 ]
Jelani, Qurat-Ul-Ain [7 ]
Tang, Yuanyuan [2 ]
Bunte, Matthew [1 ,2 ]
Labrosciano, Clementine [8 ]
Beltrame, John F. [8 ]
Spertus, John A. [1 ,2 ]
Smolderen, Kim G. [7 ]
机构
[1] Univ Missouri, Dept Internal Med, Kansas City, MO USA
[2] St Lukes Mid Amer Heart Inst, Dept Cardiovasc Med, Kansas City, MO USA
[3] Duke Univ, Div Cardiol, Sch Med, Durham, NC USA
[4] Harrington Heart & Vasc Inst, Cleveland, OH USA
[5] Case Western Univ, Sch Med, Cleveland, OH USA
[6] Brown Univ, Dept Med, Div Cardiol, Providence, RI 02912 USA
[7] Yale Univ, Sect Cardiovasc Med, Vasc Med Outcomes VAMOS Program, New Haven, CT USA
[8] Queen Elisabeth Hosp, Dept Med, Adelaide, SA, Australia
来源
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
health status; minimal clinically important difference; patients; quality of life; registries; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES; HEALTH-STATUS; REVASCULARIZATION;
D O I
10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.120.007232
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Understanding minimum clinically important differences (MCID) in patient-reported outcomes is essential in interpreting the magnitude of changes in these measures. No MCID from patients' perspectives has ever been published for peripheral artery disease-specific health status assessment tools. The Peripheral Artery Questionnaire (PAQ) is a commonly used, validated peripheral artery disease-specific health status instrument for which we sought to prospectively establish its MCID from patients' perspectives. Methods and Results: Patients presenting to vascular clinics with new or worsened claudication in the US cohort of the PORTRAIT (Patient-Centered Outcomes Related to Treatment Practices in Peripheral Arterial Disease: Investigating Trajectories) registry who completed baseline and follow-up PAQ assessments along with the Global Assessment of Functioning scale were included. Mean change in PAQ summary scores from 3- to 6-month follow-up was calculated according to Global Assessment of Functioning category. MCID was defined as the mean difference in scores between those with small improvement or deterioration and those with no change. Multivariable linear regression was used to provide an MCID estimate after adjusting for patients' 3-month PAQ score. Of the 483 patients who completed the Global Assessment of Functioning score at 6 months and who had available 3- and 6-month PAQ assessments, the mean age was 69 years, 42% were female, and 71% were White. The MCIDs for PAQ summary scale improvement and worsening were 8.7 (2.9-14.5) and -11.0 (-18.6 to -3.3), respectively. After multivariable adjustment, these were 8.9 (3.0-14.8) and -11.2 (-18.2 to -4.2), respectively. There was no significant interaction between treatment (invasive versus noninvasive) and Global Assessment of Functioning response (P=0.75). Conclusions: In patients with new or worsened claudication, a 10-point change in PAQ summary score represents an MCID. This estimate needs external validation and may inform the interpretation of PAQ scores when used as outcomes in clinical trials or in routine clinical care.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Establishing minimal clinically important differences for the Pemphigus Disease Area Index
    Tseng, Henry
    Stone, Corey
    Shulruf, Boaz
    Murrell, Dedee F.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, 2024,
  • [2] Establishing the minimal clinically important difference for the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders
    Mattos, Jose L.
    Schlosser, Rodney J.
    Mace, Jess C.
    Smith, Timothy L.
    Soler, Zachary M.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL FORUM OF ALLERGY & RHINOLOGY, 2018, 8 (09) : 1041 - 1046
  • [3] Establishing minimal clinically important differences and patient acceptable symptom state thresholds following birmingham hip resurfacing
    Pasqualini, Ignacio
    Huffman, Nickelas
    Emara, Ahmed K.
    Klika, Alison K.
    McLaughlin, John P.
    Mesko, Nathan
    Brooks, Peter J.
    Piuzzi, Nicolas S.
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2024,
  • [4] Minimal clinically important differences on the DyNaChron questionnaire after surgery
    Houdu, J.
    Jankowski, R.
    Renkes, R.
    Nguyen-Thi, P. -l.
    Gallet, P.
    Nguyen, D. -t.
    [J]. EUROPEAN ANNALS OF OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK DISEASES, 2023, 140 (06) : 261 - 266
  • [5] Minimal clinically important differences of the childhood health assessment questionnaire
    Brunner, HI
    Klein-Gitelman, MS
    Miller, MJ
    Barron, A
    Baldwin, N
    Trombley, M
    Johnson, AL
    Kress, A
    Lovell, DJ
    Giannini, EH
    [J]. JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY, 2005, 32 (01) : 150 - 161
  • [6] Minimal clinically important differences in daily physical activity outcomes following supervised and home-based exercise in peripheral artery disease
    Gardner, Andrew W.
    Montgomery, Polly S.
    Wang, Ming
    Shen, Biyi
    [J]. VASCULAR MEDICINE, 2022, 27 (02) : 142 - 149
  • [7] Establishing the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for the Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (ASQoL)
    Richard, Nicolas
    Haroon, Nigil
    Tomlinson, George
    Sari, Ismail
    Touma, Zahi
    Inman, Robert D.
    [J]. ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATOLOGY, 2018, 70
  • [8] Evaluating minimal clinically important differences for the acne-specific quality of life questionnaire
    Lori D. McLeod
    Sheri E. Fehnel
    Jane Brandman
    Tara Symonds
    [J]. PharmacoEconomics, 2003, 21 : 1069 - 1079
  • [9] Minimal clinically important differences in the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire after carpal tunnel release
    Kim, J. K.
    Jeon, S. H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HAND SURGERY-EUROPEAN VOLUME, 2013, 38E (01) : 75 - 79
  • [10] Evaluating minimal clinically important differences for the acne-specific quality of life questionnaire
    McLeod, LD
    Fehnel, SE
    Brandman, J
    Symonds, T
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2003, 21 (15) : 1069 - 1079