Cargando…
Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation
OBJECTIVES: To identify credible anchor-based minimal important differences (MIDs) for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) relevant to a BMJ Rapid Recommendations addressing subacromial decompression surgery for shoulder pain. DESIGN: Systematic review. OUTCOME MEASURES: Estimates of anchor-ba...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6398656/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30787096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028777 |
_version_ | 1783399616171999232 |
---|---|
author | Hao, Qiukui Devji, Tahira Zeraatkar, Dena Wang, Yuting Qasim, Anila Siemieniuk, Reed A C Vandvik, Per Olav Lähdeoja, Tuomas Carrasco-Labra, Alonso Agoritsas, Thomas Guyatt, Gordon |
author_facet | Hao, Qiukui Devji, Tahira Zeraatkar, Dena Wang, Yuting Qasim, Anila Siemieniuk, Reed A C Vandvik, Per Olav Lähdeoja, Tuomas Carrasco-Labra, Alonso Agoritsas, Thomas Guyatt, Gordon |
author_sort | Hao, Qiukui |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To identify credible anchor-based minimal important differences (MIDs) for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) relevant to a BMJ Rapid Recommendations addressing subacromial decompression surgery for shoulder pain. DESIGN: Systematic review. OUTCOME MEASURES: Estimates of anchor-based MIDs, and their credibility, for PROMs judged by the parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendations panel as important for informing their recommendation (pain, function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL)). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO up to August 2018. STUDY SELECTION AND REVIEW METHODS: We included original studies of any intervention for shoulder conditions reporting estimates of anchor-based MIDs for relevant PROMs. Two reviewers independently evaluated potentially eligible studies according to predefined selection criteria. Six reviewers, working in pairs, independently extracted data from eligible studies using a predesigned, standardised, pilot-tested extraction form and independently assessed the credibility of included studies using an MID credibility tool. RESULTS: We identified 22 studies involving 5562 patients that reported 74 empirically estimated anchor-based MIDs for 10 candidate instruments to assess shoulder pain, function and HRQoL. We identified MIDs of high credibility for pain and function outcomes and of low credibility for HRQoL. We offered median estimates for the systematic review team who applied these MIDs in Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence summaries and in their interpretations of results in the linked systematic review addressing the effectiveness of surgery for shoulder pain. CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides anchor-based MID estimates, as well as a rating of their credibility, for PROMs for patients with shoulder conditions. The MID estimates inform the interpretation for a linked systematic review and guideline addressing subacromial decompression surgery for shoulder pain, and could also prove useful for authors addressing other interventions for shoulder problems. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018106531. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6398656 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63986562019-03-20 Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation Hao, Qiukui Devji, Tahira Zeraatkar, Dena Wang, Yuting Qasim, Anila Siemieniuk, Reed A C Vandvik, Per Olav Lähdeoja, Tuomas Carrasco-Labra, Alonso Agoritsas, Thomas Guyatt, Gordon BMJ Open Evidence Based Practice OBJECTIVES: To identify credible anchor-based minimal important differences (MIDs) for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) relevant to a BMJ Rapid Recommendations addressing subacromial decompression surgery for shoulder pain. DESIGN: Systematic review. OUTCOME MEASURES: Estimates of anchor-based MIDs, and their credibility, for PROMs judged by the parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendations panel as important for informing their recommendation (pain, function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL)). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO up to August 2018. STUDY SELECTION AND REVIEW METHODS: We included original studies of any intervention for shoulder conditions reporting estimates of anchor-based MIDs for relevant PROMs. Two reviewers independently evaluated potentially eligible studies according to predefined selection criteria. Six reviewers, working in pairs, independently extracted data from eligible studies using a predesigned, standardised, pilot-tested extraction form and independently assessed the credibility of included studies using an MID credibility tool. RESULTS: We identified 22 studies involving 5562 patients that reported 74 empirically estimated anchor-based MIDs for 10 candidate instruments to assess shoulder pain, function and HRQoL. We identified MIDs of high credibility for pain and function outcomes and of low credibility for HRQoL. We offered median estimates for the systematic review team who applied these MIDs in Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence summaries and in their interpretations of results in the linked systematic review addressing the effectiveness of surgery for shoulder pain. CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides anchor-based MID estimates, as well as a rating of their credibility, for PROMs for patients with shoulder conditions. The MID estimates inform the interpretation for a linked systematic review and guideline addressing subacromial decompression surgery for shoulder pain, and could also prove useful for authors addressing other interventions for shoulder problems. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018106531. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6398656/ /pubmed/30787096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028777 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Evidence Based Practice Hao, Qiukui Devji, Tahira Zeraatkar, Dena Wang, Yuting Qasim, Anila Siemieniuk, Reed A C Vandvik, Per Olav Lähdeoja, Tuomas Carrasco-Labra, Alonso Agoritsas, Thomas Guyatt, Gordon Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation |
title | Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation |
title_full | Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation |
title_fullStr | Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation |
title_full_unstemmed | Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation |
title_short | Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation |
title_sort | minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review to inform a bmj rapid recommendation |
topic | Evidence Based Practice |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6398656/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30787096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028777 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT haoqiukui minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation AT devjitahira minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation AT zeraatkardena minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation AT wangyuting minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation AT qasimanila minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation AT siemieniukreedac minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation AT vandvikperolav minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation AT lahdeojatuomas minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation AT carrascolabraalonso minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation AT agoritsasthomas minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation AT guyattgordon minimalimportantdifferencesforimprovementinshoulderconditionpatientreportedoutcomesasystematicreviewtoinformabmjrapidrecommendation |