Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: Clinical article

Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine

Volumn 14, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 598-604

  Parker, Scott L ^a   Adogwa, Owoicho ^b   Paul, Alexandra R ^a   Anderson, William N ^c   Aaronson, Oran ^b   Cheng, Joseph S ^b   McGirt, Matthew J ^b  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c Independent Statistician   (United States)

Author keywords

Interbody fusion; Minimum clinically important difference; Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BACKACHE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DISABILITY; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; LEG PAIN; LUMBAR SPINE; PAIN ASSESSMENT; QUESTIONNAIRE; SPINE FUSION; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; TRANSFORAMINAL LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AREA UNDER CURVE; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; LUMBOSACRAL REGION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN MEASUREMENT; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; QUESTIONNAIRES; ROC CURVE; SPINAL FUSION; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 79955638763     PISSN: 15475654     EISSN: 15475646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3171/2010.12.SPINE10472     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Badia X, Diaz-Prieto A, Gorriz MT, Herdman M, Torrado H, Farrero E, et al: Using the EuroQol-5D to measure changes in quality of life 12 months after discharge from an intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 27:1901-1907, 2001
2. Beaton DE: Simple as possible? Or too simple? Possible limits to the universality of the one half standard deviation. Med Care 41:593-596, 2003
3. Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Campbell MJ, Anderson PA: Neck Disability Index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion. Spine J 10:469-474, 2010
4. Copay AG, Glassman SD, Subach BR, Berven S, Schuler TC, Carreon LY: Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales. Spine J 8:968-974, 2008
5. Copay AG, Subach BR, Glassman SD, Polly DW Jr, Schuler TC: Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J 7:541-546, 2007 (Pubitemid 47471437)
6. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O'Brien JP: The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66:271-273, 1980 (Pubitemid 11234479)
7. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB: The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 25:2940-2952, 2000
8. Gallagher EJ, Liebman M, Bijur PE: Prospective validation of clinically important changes in pain severity measured on a visual analog scale. Ann Emerg Med 38:633-638, 2001 (Pubitemid 33131561)
9. Grönblad M, Hupli M, Wennerstrand P, Järvinen E, Lukinmaa A, Kouri JP, et al: Intercorrelation and test-retest reliability of the Pain Disability Index (PDI) and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) and their correlation with pain intensity in low back pain patients. Clin J Pain 9:189-195, 1993 (Pubitemid 23275175)
10. Hägg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A: The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12:12-20, 2003 (Pubitemid 36286825)
11. Hägg O, Fritzell P, Odén A, Nordwall A: Simplifying outcome measurement: evaluation of instruments for measuring outcome after fusion surgery for chronic low back pain. Spine 27:1213-1222, 2002 (Pubitemid 34596341)
12. Hays RD, Woolley JM: The concept of clinically meaningful difference in health-related quality-of-life research. How meaningful is it? Pharmacoeconomics 18:419-423, 2000
13. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH: Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10:407-415, 1989 (Pubitemid 20025670)
14. Jansson KA, Németh G, Granath F, Jönsson B, Blomqvist P: Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) before and one year after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:210-216, 2009
15. Kulkarni AV: Distribution-based and anchor-based approaches provided different interpretability estimates for the Hydrocephalus Outcome Questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 59:176-184, 2006
16. Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW: Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care 41:582-592, 2003
17. Roland M, Fairbank J: The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Spine 25:3115-3124, 2000 (Pubitemid 32042943)
18. Samsa G, Edelman D, Rothman ML, Williams GR, Lipscomb J, Matchar D: Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the Health Utilities Index Mark II. Pharmacoeconomics 15:141-155, 1999 (Pubitemid 29093257)
19. Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL, Guyatt GH: Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 1. Phys Ther 78:1186-1196, 1998 (Pubitemid 28507242)
20. Taylor SJ, Taylor AE, Foy MA, Fogg AJ: Responsiveness of common outcome measures for patients with low back pain. Spine 24:1805-1812, 1999
21. van der Roer N, Ostelo RW, Bekkering GE, van Tulder MW, de Vet HC: Minimal clinically important change for pain intensity, functional status, and general health status in patients with nonspecific low back pain. Spine 31:578-582, 2006
22. Ware JE Jr: SF-36 health survey update. Spine 25:3130-3139, 2000
23. Wright JG: Interpreting health-related quality of life scores: the simple rule of seven may not be so simple. Med Care 41: 597-598, 2003
24. Wyrwich KW, Nienaber NA, Tierney WM, Wolinsky FD: Linking clinical relevance and statistical significance in evaluating intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. Med Care 37:469-478, 1999
25. Wyrwich KW, Tierney WM, Wolinsky FD: Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 52:861-873, 1999 (Pubitemid 29385600)