Determination and comparison of the smallest detectable change (SDC) and the minimal important change (MIC) of four-shoulder patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2013, Pages

  Van Kampen, Derk A ^a   Willems, W J ^b   van Beers, Loes W A H ^b   Castelein, Rene M ^c   Scholtes, Vanessa A B ^b   Terwee, Caroline B ^d  

^a Waterland Hospital   (Netherlands)

^b ONZE LIEVE VROUWE GASTHUIS   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^d VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

DASH; Interpretation; MIC; Oxford shoulder score; PROM; SDC; Shoulder; Simple shoulder test

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; DISABILITY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INJURY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; ROTATOR CUFF; SHOULDER; SHOULDER IMPINGEMENT SYNDROME; SHOULDER PAIN; TREATMENT OUTCOME; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; ROTATOR CUFF; SHOULDER IMPINGEMENT SYNDROME; SHOULDER JOINT; SHOULDER PAIN; TREATMENT OUTCOME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84887334990     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1749799X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1749-799X-8-40     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Turkelson CM, Zhao G. Musculoskeletal Conditions and Disorders: Occurrence and Healthcare Use in the United States Rosemont: Department of Research and Scientific Affairs, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, http://www.aaos.org/.
2. Patrick DL, Burke LB, Powers JH, Scott JA, Rock EP, Dawisha S, ONeill R, Kennedy DL. Patient-reported outcomes to support medical product labeling claims: FDA perspective. Value Health 2007, 10(Suppl 2):S125-S137.
3. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res 2010, 19:539-549. 10.1007/s11136-010-9606-8, 2852520, 20169472.
4. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW. Protocol of the COSMIN study: COnsensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006, 6:2. 10.1186/1471-2288-6-2, 1368990, 16433905.
5. de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL. Measurement in Medicine 2011, New York: Cambridge University Press.
6. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989, 10:407-415. 10.1016/0197-2456(89)90005-6, 2691207.
7. Redelmeier DA, Lorig K. Assessing the clinical importance of symptomatic improvements. An illustration in rheumatology. Arch Intern Med 1993, 153:1337-1342. 10.1001/archinte.1993.00410110045008, 8507124.
8. Terwee CB, Roorda LD, Knol DL, De Boer MR, de Vet HCW. Linking measurement error to minimal important change of patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2009, 62:1062-1067. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.011, 19230609.
9. Schünemann HJ, Akl EA, Guyatt GH. Interpreting the results of patient reported outcome measures in clinical trials: the clinician's perspective. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006, 4:62. 10.1186/1477-7525-4-62, 1584217, 16973000.
10. Beaton DE, van Eerd D, Smith P, van der Velde G, Cullen K, Kennedy CA, Hogg-Johnson S. Minimal change is sensitive, less specific to recovery: a diagnostic testing approach to interpretability. J Clin Epidemiol 2011, 64:487-496. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.012, 21109396.
11. Gummesson C, Atroshi I, Ekdahl C. The disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) outcome questionnaire: longitudinal construct validity and measuring self-rated health change after surgery. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2003, 4:11. 10.1186/1471-2474-4-11, 165599, 12809562.
12. Mintken PE, Glynn P, Cleland JA. Psychometric properties of the shortened disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH) and numeric pain rating scale in patients with shoulder pain. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2009, 18:920-926. 10.1016/j.jse.2008.12.015, 19297202.
13. Polson K, Reid D, McNair PJ, Larmer P. Responsiveness, minimal importance difference and minimal detectable change scores of the shortened disability arm shoulder hand (QuickDASH) questionnaire. Man Ther 2010, 15:404-407. 10.1016/j.math.2010.03.008, 20434942.
14. Schmitt JS, Di Fabio RP. Reliable change and minimum important difference (MID) proportions facilitated group responsiveness comparisons using individual threshold criteria. J Clin Epidemiol 2004, 57:1008-1018. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.02.007, 15528051.
15. Tashjian RZ, Deloach J, Green A, Porucznik CA, Powell AP. Minimal clinically important differences in ASES and simple shoulder test scores after nonoperative treatment of rotator cuff disease. J Bone Joint Surg 2010, 92:296-303. 10.2106/JBJS.H.01296, 20124055.
16. Gabel CP, Michener LA, Burkett B, Neller A. The Upper Limb Functional Index: development and determination of reliability, validity, and responsiveness. J Hand Ther 2006, 19:328-348. quiz 349, 10.1197/j.jht.2006.04.001, 16861132.
17. Gabel CP, Michener LA, Melloh M, Burkett B. Modification of the upper limb functional index to a three-point response improves clinimetric properties. J Hand Ther 2010, 23:41-51. quiz 52, 10.1016/j.jht.2009.09.007, 19963344.
18. Roy J-S, MacDermid JC, Faber KJ, Drosdowech DS, Athwal GS. The simple shoulder test is responsive in assessing change following shoulder arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2010, 40:413-421. 10.2519/jospt.2010.3209, 20592481.
19. Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, Ostelo RWJG, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW. Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res 2012, 21:651-657. 10.1007/s11136-011-9960-1, 3323819, 21732199.
20. Lippitt SB, Matsen FA. A practical tool for evaluating function: the simple shoulder test. The Shoulder: A Balance of Mobility and Stability 1993, 545-559. Rosemont: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.
21. Lippitt SB, Harryman DT, Matsen FA. The Shoulder: A Balance of Mobility and Stability 1993, 501-518. Rosemont: American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons.
22. Beaton D, Richards RR. Assessing the reliability and responsiveness of 5 shoulder questionnaires. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1998, 7:565-572. 10.1016/S1058-2746(98)90002-7, 9883415.
23. Lippitt SB, Matsen FA. A practical tool for evaluating function: the simple shoulder test. The Shoulder: A Balance of Mobility and Stability 1993, Rosemont: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.
24. van Kampen DA, van Beers LWAH, Scholtes VAB, Terwee CB, Willems WJ. Validation of the Dutch version of the simple shoulder test. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011, 21(6):808-814.
25. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. The upper extremity collaborative Group (UECG): development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand). Am J Ind Med 1996, 29:602-608. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:6<602::AID-AJIM4>3.0.CO;2-L, 8773720.
26. Kennedy CA, Beaton DE, Solway S, McConeell S, Bombardier C. The DASH and QuickDASH Outcome Measure User's Manual 2011, Toronto: Institute of Work & Health, 3.
27. Beaton DE, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Wright JG, Tarasuk V, Bombardier C. Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity. J Hand Ther 2001, 14:128-146. 10.1016/S0894-1130(01)80043-0, 11382253.
28. Desai AS, Dramis A, Hearnden AJ. Critical appraisal of subjective outcome measures used in the assessment of shoulder disability. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2010, 92:9-13. 3024607, 20056048.
29. Veehof MM, Sleegers EJA, van Veldhoven NHMJ, Schuurman AH, van Meeteren NLU. Psychometric qualities of the Dutch language version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH-DLV). J Hand Ther 2002, 15:347-354. 10.1016/S0894-1130(02)80006-0, 12449349.
30. Beaton DE, Wright JG, Katz JN. Upper extremity collaborative group: development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87:1038-1046. 10.2106/JBJS.D.02060, 15866967.
31. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996, 78:593-600.
32. Cloke DJ, Lynn SE, Watson H, Steen IN, Purdy S, Williams JR. A comparison of functional, patient-based scores in subacromial impingement. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2005, 14:380-384. 10.1016/j.jse.2004.08.008, 16015237.
33. Berendes T, Pilot P, Willems WJ, Verburg H, Slaa te R. Validation of the Dutch version of the Oxford Shoulder Score. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010, 19:829-836. 10.1016/j.jse.2010.01.017, 20421170.
34. de Vet HC, Terwee CB, Ostelo RW, Beckerman H, Knol DL, Bouter LM. Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006, 4:54. 10.1186/1477-7525-4-54, 1560110, 16925807.
35. Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2008, 61:102-109. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012, 18177782.
36. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2010, 63:737-745. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006, 20494804.
37. de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Bouter LM. When to use agreement versus reliability measures. J Clin Epidemiol 2006, 59:1033-1039. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.10.015, 16980142.
38. Stratford PW, Riddle DL. When minimal detectable change exceeds a diagnostic test-based threshold change value for an outcome measure: resolving the conflict. Phys Ther 2012, 92:1338-1347. 10.2522/ptj.20120002, 22767887.
39. Lu WS, Wang CH, Lin JH, Sheu CF, Hsieh CL. The minimal detectable change of the simplified stroke rehabilitation assessment of movement measure. J Rehabil Med 2008, 40:615-619. 10.2340/16501977-0230, 19020694.
40. Martin Bland J, Altman D. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 327:307-310.
41. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003, 56:395-407. 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00044-1, 12812812.
42. Hays RD, Farivar SS, Liu H. Approaches and recommendations for estimating minimally important differences for health-related quality of life measures. COPD 2005, 2:63-67. 10.1081/COPD-200050663, 17136964.
43. Norman GR, Stratford P, Regehr G. Methodological problems in the retrospective computation of responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach. J Clin Epidemiol 1997, 50:869-879. 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00097-8, 9291871.
44. Angst F, Schwyzer H-K, Aeschlimann A, Simmen BR, Goldhahn J. Measures of adult shoulder function: disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) and its short version (QuickDASH), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Society standardized shoulder assessment form, Constant (Murley) Score (CS), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Shoulder Disability Questionnaire (SDQ), and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI). Arthritis Care Res 2011, 63:S174-S188.
45. King M. A point of minimal important difference (MID): a critique of terminology and methods. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2011, 11:171-184. 10.1586/erp.11.9, 21476819.
46. Terwee CB, Roorda LD, Dekker J, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Peat G, Jordan KP, Croft P, de Vet HCW. Mind the MIC: large variation among populations and methods. J Clin Epidemiol 2010, 63:524-534. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.08.010, 19926446.
47. Yost KJ, Eton DT, Garcia SF, Cella D. Minimally important differences were estimated for six Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients. J Clin Epidemiol 2011, 64:507-516. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.11.018, 3076200, 21447427.