Minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: Understanding clinical versus statistical significance - Clinical article

Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine

Volumn 16, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 471-478

  Parker, Scott L ^a,b   Mendenhall, Stephen K ^a,b   Shau, David N ^a,b   Adogwa, Owoicho ^a,b   Anderson, William N ^c   Devin, Clinton J ^a,b   McGirt, Matthew J ^a,b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c NONE

Author keywords

Failed back surgery syndrome; Lumbar spine; Minimum clinically important difference

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BACKACHE; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; LEG PAIN; LOW BACK PAIN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMUM CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE; MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM PARAMETERS; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECURRENT DISEASE; SAME LEVEL RECURRENT LUMBAR STENOSIS; SHORT FORM 36; SPINAL CORD DECOMPRESSION; SPINE FUSION; THERAPY EFFECT; VERTEBRAL CANAL STENOSIS; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; ZUNG DEPRESSION SCALE;

ADULT; AGED; COHORT STUDIES; DECOMPRESSION, SURGICAL; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN; PAIN MEASUREMENT; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECURRENCE; REOPERATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SPINAL FUSION; SPINAL STENOSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84860601154     PISSN: 15475654     EISSN: 15475646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3171/2012.1.SPINE11842     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adogwa O, Parker SL, Shau D, Mendelhall SK, Cheng J, Aaronson O, et al: Long-term outcomes of revision fusion for lumbar pseudarthrosis. Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 15:393-398, 2011
2. 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 (Pubitemid 33145076)
3. 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
4. Burkus JK, Dorchak JD, Sanders DL: Radiographic assessment of interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein type 2. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:372-377, 2003
5. 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
6. 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
7. 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)
8. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O'Brien JP: The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66:271-273, 1980 (Pubitemid 11234479)
9. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB: The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:2940-2952, 2000
10. 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)
11. Gandek B, Ware JE, Aaronson NK, Apolone G, Bjorner JB, Brazier JE, et al: Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1171-1178, 1998 (Pubitemid 28527173)
12. 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)
13. 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
14. 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)
15. 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
16. Johnson JA, Coons SJ, Ergo A, Szava-Kovats G: Valuation of EuroQOL (EQ-5D) health states in an adult US sample. Pharmacoeconomics 13:421-433, 1998 (Pubitemid 28140701)
17. Kelly AM: The minimum clinically significant difference in visual analogue scale pain score does not differ with severity of pain. Emerg Med J 18:205-207, 2001
18. 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
19. Parker SL, Adogwa O, Paul AR, Anderson WN, Aaronson O, Cheng JS, et al: Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 14:598-604, 2011
20. Resnick DK, Choudhri TF, Dailey AT, Groff MW, Khoo L, Matz PG, et al: Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 9: fusion in patients with stenosis and spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 2:679-685, 2005
21. Resnick DK, Choudhri TF, Dailey AT, Groff MW, Khoo L, Matz PG, et al: Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 10: fusion following decompression in patients with stenosis without spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 2:686-691, 2005
22. Roland M, Fairbank J: The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:3115-3124, 2000 (Erratum in Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:847, 2001)
23. 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)
24. Thurber S, Snow M, Honts CR: The Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale: convergent validity and diagnostic discrimination. Assessment 9:401-405, 2002
25. Tosteson AN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Skinner JS, Herkowitz H, Albert T, et al: Surgical treatment of spinal stenosis with and without degenerative spondylolisthesis: cost-effectiveness after 2 years. Ann Intern Med 149:845-853, 2008
26. 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 (Phila Pa 1976) 31:578-582, 2006
27. Ware JE Jr: SF-36 health survey update. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:3130-3139, 2000
28. 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
29. 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
30. 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)
31. Zung WW, Richards CB, Short MJ: Self-rating depression scale in an outpatient clinic. Further validation of the SDS. Arch Gen Psychiatry 13:508-515, 1965