Cargando…

Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for common outcome instruments in patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture - analysis of the FISH randomised clinical trial data

BACKGROUND: Two common ways of assessing the clinical relevance of treatment outcomes are the minimal important difference (MID) and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). The former represents the smallest change in the given outcome that makes people feel better, while the latter is the symp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ibounig, Thomas, Juurakko, Joona, Lähdeoja, Tuomas, Sumrein, Bakir O., Järvinen, Teppo L. N., Paavola, Mika, Ardern, Clare L., Karjalainen, Teemu, Taimela, Simo, Rämö, Lasse
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9650807/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36357855
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01776-6
_version_ 1784828105716662272
author Ibounig, Thomas
Juurakko, Joona
Lähdeoja, Tuomas
Sumrein, Bakir O.
Järvinen, Teppo L. N.
Paavola, Mika
Ardern, Clare L.
Karjalainen, Teemu
Taimela, Simo
Rämö, Lasse
author_facet Ibounig, Thomas
Juurakko, Joona
Lähdeoja, Tuomas
Sumrein, Bakir O.
Järvinen, Teppo L. N.
Paavola, Mika
Ardern, Clare L.
Karjalainen, Teemu
Taimela, Simo
Rämö, Lasse
author_sort Ibounig, Thomas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Two common ways of assessing the clinical relevance of treatment outcomes are the minimal important difference (MID) and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). The former represents the smallest change in the given outcome that makes people feel better, while the latter is the symptom level at which patients feel well. METHODS: We recruited 124 patients with a humeral shaft fracture to a randomised controlled trial comparing surgery to nonsurgical care. Outcome instruments included the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, the Constant-Murley score, and two numerical rating scales (NRS) for pain (at rest and on activities). A reduction in DASH and pain scores, and increase in the Constant-Murley score represents improvement. We used four methods (receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve, the mean difference of change, the mean change, and predictive modelling methods) to determine the MID, and two methods (the ROC and 75th percentile) for the PASS. As an anchor for the analyses, we assessed patients’ satisfaction regarding the injured arm using a 7-item Likert-scale. RESULTS: The change in the anchor question was strongly correlated with the change in DASH, moderately correlated with the change of the Constant-Murley score and pain on activities, and poorly correlated with the change in pain at rest (Spearman’s rho 0.51, -0.40, 0.36, and 0.15, respectively). Depending on the method, the MID estimates for DASH ranged from -6.7 to -11.2, pain on activities from -0.5 to -1.3, and the Constant-Murley score from 6.3 to 13.5. The ROC method provided reliable estimates for DASH (-6.7 points, Area Under Curve [AUC] 0.77), the Constant-Murley Score (7.6 points, AUC 0.71), and pain on activities (-0.5 points, AUC 0.68). The PASS estimates were 14 and 10 for DASH, 2.5 and 2 for pain on activities, and 68 and 74 for the Constant-Murley score with the ROC and 75th percentile methods, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study provides credible estimates for the MID and PASS values of DASH, pain on activities and the Constant-Murley score, but not for pain at rest. The suggested cut-offs can be used in future studies and for assessing treatment success in patients with humeral shaft fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01719887, first registration 01/11/2012. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01776-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9650807
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96508072022-11-15 Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for common outcome instruments in patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture - analysis of the FISH randomised clinical trial data Ibounig, Thomas Juurakko, Joona Lähdeoja, Tuomas Sumrein, Bakir O. Järvinen, Teppo L. N. Paavola, Mika Ardern, Clare L. Karjalainen, Teemu Taimela, Simo Rämö, Lasse BMC Med Res Methodol Research BACKGROUND: Two common ways of assessing the clinical relevance of treatment outcomes are the minimal important difference (MID) and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). The former represents the smallest change in the given outcome that makes people feel better, while the latter is the symptom level at which patients feel well. METHODS: We recruited 124 patients with a humeral shaft fracture to a randomised controlled trial comparing surgery to nonsurgical care. Outcome instruments included the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, the Constant-Murley score, and two numerical rating scales (NRS) for pain (at rest and on activities). A reduction in DASH and pain scores, and increase in the Constant-Murley score represents improvement. We used four methods (receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve, the mean difference of change, the mean change, and predictive modelling methods) to determine the MID, and two methods (the ROC and 75th percentile) for the PASS. As an anchor for the analyses, we assessed patients’ satisfaction regarding the injured arm using a 7-item Likert-scale. RESULTS: The change in the anchor question was strongly correlated with the change in DASH, moderately correlated with the change of the Constant-Murley score and pain on activities, and poorly correlated with the change in pain at rest (Spearman’s rho 0.51, -0.40, 0.36, and 0.15, respectively). Depending on the method, the MID estimates for DASH ranged from -6.7 to -11.2, pain on activities from -0.5 to -1.3, and the Constant-Murley score from 6.3 to 13.5. The ROC method provided reliable estimates for DASH (-6.7 points, Area Under Curve [AUC] 0.77), the Constant-Murley Score (7.6 points, AUC 0.71), and pain on activities (-0.5 points, AUC 0.68). The PASS estimates were 14 and 10 for DASH, 2.5 and 2 for pain on activities, and 68 and 74 for the Constant-Murley score with the ROC and 75th percentile methods, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study provides credible estimates for the MID and PASS values of DASH, pain on activities and the Constant-Murley score, but not for pain at rest. The suggested cut-offs can be used in future studies and for assessing treatment success in patients with humeral shaft fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01719887, first registration 01/11/2012. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01776-6. BioMed Central 2022-11-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9650807/ /pubmed/36357855 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01776-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Ibounig, Thomas
Juurakko, Joona
Lähdeoja, Tuomas
Sumrein, Bakir O.
Järvinen, Teppo L. N.
Paavola, Mika
Ardern, Clare L.
Karjalainen, Teemu
Taimela, Simo
Rämö, Lasse
Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for common outcome instruments in patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture - analysis of the FISH randomised clinical trial data
title Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for common outcome instruments in patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture - analysis of the FISH randomised clinical trial data
title_full Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for common outcome instruments in patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture - analysis of the FISH randomised clinical trial data
title_fullStr Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for common outcome instruments in patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture - analysis of the FISH randomised clinical trial data
title_full_unstemmed Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for common outcome instruments in patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture - analysis of the FISH randomised clinical trial data
title_short Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for common outcome instruments in patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture - analysis of the FISH randomised clinical trial data
title_sort minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for common outcome instruments in patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture - analysis of the fish randomised clinical trial data
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9650807/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36357855
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01776-6
work_keys_str_mv AT ibounigthomas minimalimportantdifferenceandpatientacceptablesymptomstateforcommonoutcomeinstrumentsinpatientswithaclosedhumeralshaftfractureanalysisofthefishrandomisedclinicaltrialdata
AT juurakkojoona minimalimportantdifferenceandpatientacceptablesymptomstateforcommonoutcomeinstrumentsinpatientswithaclosedhumeralshaftfractureanalysisofthefishrandomisedclinicaltrialdata
AT lahdeojatuomas minimalimportantdifferenceandpatientacceptablesymptomstateforcommonoutcomeinstrumentsinpatientswithaclosedhumeralshaftfractureanalysisofthefishrandomisedclinicaltrialdata
AT sumreinbakiro minimalimportantdifferenceandpatientacceptablesymptomstateforcommonoutcomeinstrumentsinpatientswithaclosedhumeralshaftfractureanalysisofthefishrandomisedclinicaltrialdata
AT jarvinenteppoln minimalimportantdifferenceandpatientacceptablesymptomstateforcommonoutcomeinstrumentsinpatientswithaclosedhumeralshaftfractureanalysisofthefishrandomisedclinicaltrialdata
AT paavolamika minimalimportantdifferenceandpatientacceptablesymptomstateforcommonoutcomeinstrumentsinpatientswithaclosedhumeralshaftfractureanalysisofthefishrandomisedclinicaltrialdata
AT ardernclarel minimalimportantdifferenceandpatientacceptablesymptomstateforcommonoutcomeinstrumentsinpatientswithaclosedhumeralshaftfractureanalysisofthefishrandomisedclinicaltrialdata
AT karjalainenteemu minimalimportantdifferenceandpatientacceptablesymptomstateforcommonoutcomeinstrumentsinpatientswithaclosedhumeralshaftfractureanalysisofthefishrandomisedclinicaltrialdata
AT taimelasimo minimalimportantdifferenceandpatientacceptablesymptomstateforcommonoutcomeinstrumentsinpatientswithaclosedhumeralshaftfractureanalysisofthefishrandomisedclinicaltrialdata
AT ramolasse minimalimportantdifferenceandpatientacceptablesymptomstateforcommonoutcomeinstrumentsinpatientswithaclosedhumeralshaftfractureanalysisofthefishrandomisedclinicaltrialdata