Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: The minimal clinically important improvement

Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases

Volumn 64, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 29-33

  Tubach, F ^a   Ravaud, P ^j   Baron, G ^j   Falissard, B ^b   Logeart, I ^c   Bellamy, N ^d   Bombardier, C ^e   Felson, D ^f   Hochberg, M ^g   Van Der Heijde, D ^h   Dougados, M ⁱ  

^a BICHAT HOSPITAL   (France)

^b HÔPITAL PAUL BROUSSE   (France)

^c Dohme Chibret Centre de Recherche Riom   (France)

^d UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^e INSTITUTE FOR WORK AND HEALTH   (Canada)

^f BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^h MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

ⁱ Hôpital Cochin ^*  (France)

^j NONE

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; COHORT ANALYSIS; DISEASE ACTIVITY; DISEASE DURATION; FEMALE; HIP OSTEOARTHRITIS; HUMAN; KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PHYSICAL DISABILITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SELF REPORT; SEX; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

ADULT; AGED; ANTHROPOMETRY; ANTI-INFLAMMATORY AGENTS, NON-STEROIDAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS, HIP; OSTEOARTHRITIS, KNEE; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 19944427129     PISSN: 00034967     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/ard.2004.022905     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bellamy N, Kirwan J, Boers M, Brooks P, Strand V, Tugwell P, et al. Recommendations for a core set of outcome measures for future phase III clinical trials in knee, hip, and hand osteoarthritis. Consensus development at OMERACT III. J Rheumatol 1997;24:799-802.
2. GREES. Recommendations for the registration of drugs used in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Group for the respect of ethics and excellence in science (GREES): osteoarthritis section, Ann Rheum Dis 1996;55:552-7.
3. Altman R, Brandt K, Hochberg M, Moskowitz R, Bellamy N, Bloch DA, et al. Design and conduct of clinical trials in patients with osteoarthritis: recommendations from a task force of the Osteoarthritis Research Society. Results from a workshop. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1996;4:217-43.
4. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Katz JN, Wright JG. A taxonomy for responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 2001;54:1204-17.
5. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A, Griffith LE. Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47:81-7.
6. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989;10:407-15.
7. Schwartz AL, Meek PM, Nail LM, Fargo J, Lundquist M, Donofrio M, et al. Measurement of fatigue, determining minimally important clinical differences. J Clin Epidemiol 2002;55:239-44.
8. Altman R, Alarcon G, Appelrouth D, Bloch D, Borenstein D, Brandt K, et al. The American College or Rheumatology criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis of the hip. Arthritis Rheum 1991;34:505-14.
9. Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D, Bole G, Borenstein D, Brandt K, et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum 1986;29:1039-49.
10. Wright JG. Interpreting health-related quality of life scores: the simple rule of seven may not be so simple. Med Care 2003;41:597-8.
11. Brooks P, Tugwell P, Strand CV, Simon L. International Consensus Conference on Outcome Measures in Rheumatology, Gold Coast, Australia, April 11-14, 2002. J Rheumatol 2003;30:866-7.
12. Streiner DL. Breaking up is hard to do: the heartbreak of dichotomizing continuous data. Can J Psychiatry 2002;47:262-6.
13. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:395-407.
14. Beaton DE. Simple as possible? Or too simple? Possible limits to the universality of the one half standard deviation. Med Care 2003;41:593-6.
15. Bellamy N, Carette S, Ford PM, Kean WF, le Riche NG, Lussier A, et al. Osteoarthritis antirheumatic drug trials. III. Setting the delta for clinical trials-results of a consensus development (Delphi) exercise. J Rheumatol 1992;19:451-7.
16. Ehrich EW, Davies GM, Watson DJ, Bolognese JA, Seidenberg BC, Bellamy N. Minimal perceptible clinical improvement with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index questionnaire and global assessments in patients with osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol 2000;27:2635-41.
17. Riddle DL, Stratford PW, Binkley JM. Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 2. Phys Ther 1998;78:1197-207.
18. Roland M, Morris R. A study of the natural history of back pain. Part I: development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine 1983;8:141-4.