Cargando…

Minimal clinically important difference of Liverpool Elbow Score in elbow arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) that allows the interpretation of small but meaningful changes after intervention has not been reported for the Liverpool Elbow Score (LES). This study aimed to determine the MCID for the LES in patients undergoing total elbow replacemen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vishwanathan, Karthik, Alizadehkhaiyat, Omid, Kemp, Graham J., Frostick, Simon P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6340916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30675558
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jses.2017.07.004
_version_ 1783388854567305216
author Vishwanathan, Karthik
Alizadehkhaiyat, Omid
Kemp, Graham J.
Frostick, Simon P.
author_facet Vishwanathan, Karthik
Alizadehkhaiyat, Omid
Kemp, Graham J.
Frostick, Simon P.
author_sort Vishwanathan, Karthik
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) that allows the interpretation of small but meaningful changes after intervention has not been reported for the Liverpool Elbow Score (LES). This study aimed to determine the MCID for the LES in patients undergoing total elbow replacement. METHODS: This observational study is based on preoperative and 1-year postoperative clinical outcome of total elbow replacement (Discovery Elbow System) in 71 patients using the LES. A 4-point Likert-like transition scale was used to evaluate patient satisfaction after total elbow replacement. A combination of distribution-based methods (standard deviation [SD] of change in the LES, standard error of mean, smallest detectable change [SDC]) and anchor-based methods (receiver operating curve, difference of mean of change in LES) was used to determine range of MCID values. RESULTS: The mean change in the LES value was 2.4 (SD, 2.1). The estimated SDC value with upper limit of 90% confidence interval was 1.5. The mean change in LES of “satisfied” and “somewhat satisfied” patient groups was 2.4 (SD, 2.1) and 1.1 (SD, 1.4), respectively, and the difference between both means (MCID based on difference of mean in 2 subgroups) was 1.3. According to receiver operating curve analysis, the value of MCID was 1.6. CONCLUSION: The MCID value for the LES was estimated to range between 0.7 and 1.8. The estimated SDC value was 1.5. We propose that the “true” MCID value of the LES would be between 1.6 and 1.8 to ensure that the value is higher than the measurement error of the LES.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6340916
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63409162019-01-23 Minimal clinically important difference of Liverpool Elbow Score in elbow arthroplasty Vishwanathan, Karthik Alizadehkhaiyat, Omid Kemp, Graham J. Frostick, Simon P. JSES Open Access Article BACKGROUND: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) that allows the interpretation of small but meaningful changes after intervention has not been reported for the Liverpool Elbow Score (LES). This study aimed to determine the MCID for the LES in patients undergoing total elbow replacement. METHODS: This observational study is based on preoperative and 1-year postoperative clinical outcome of total elbow replacement (Discovery Elbow System) in 71 patients using the LES. A 4-point Likert-like transition scale was used to evaluate patient satisfaction after total elbow replacement. A combination of distribution-based methods (standard deviation [SD] of change in the LES, standard error of mean, smallest detectable change [SDC]) and anchor-based methods (receiver operating curve, difference of mean of change in LES) was used to determine range of MCID values. RESULTS: The mean change in the LES value was 2.4 (SD, 2.1). The estimated SDC value with upper limit of 90% confidence interval was 1.5. The mean change in LES of “satisfied” and “somewhat satisfied” patient groups was 2.4 (SD, 2.1) and 1.1 (SD, 1.4), respectively, and the difference between both means (MCID based on difference of mean in 2 subgroups) was 1.3. According to receiver operating curve analysis, the value of MCID was 1.6. CONCLUSION: The MCID value for the LES was estimated to range between 0.7 and 1.8. The estimated SDC value was 1.5. We propose that the “true” MCID value of the LES would be between 1.6 and 1.8 to ensure that the value is higher than the measurement error of the LES. Elsevier 2017-08-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6340916/ /pubmed/30675558 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jses.2017.07.004 Text en © 2017 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Vishwanathan, Karthik
Alizadehkhaiyat, Omid
Kemp, Graham J.
Frostick, Simon P.
Minimal clinically important difference of Liverpool Elbow Score in elbow arthroplasty
title Minimal clinically important difference of Liverpool Elbow Score in elbow arthroplasty
title_full Minimal clinically important difference of Liverpool Elbow Score in elbow arthroplasty
title_fullStr Minimal clinically important difference of Liverpool Elbow Score in elbow arthroplasty
title_full_unstemmed Minimal clinically important difference of Liverpool Elbow Score in elbow arthroplasty
title_short Minimal clinically important difference of Liverpool Elbow Score in elbow arthroplasty
title_sort minimal clinically important difference of liverpool elbow score in elbow arthroplasty
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6340916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30675558
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jses.2017.07.004
work_keys_str_mv AT vishwanathankarthik minimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceofliverpoolelbowscoreinelbowarthroplasty
AT alizadehkhaiyatomid minimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceofliverpoolelbowscoreinelbowarthroplasty
AT kempgrahamj minimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceofliverpoolelbowscoreinelbowarthroplasty
AT frosticksimonp minimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceofliverpoolelbowscoreinelbowarthroplasty