Minimal important changes in the Constant-Murley score in patients with subacromial pain

Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery

Volumn 23, Issue 8, 2014, Pages 1083-1090

  Holmgren, Theresa ^a   Öberg, Birgitta ^a   Adolfsson, Lars ^a,b   Björnsson Hallgren, Hanna ^a,b   Johansson, Kajsa ^a  

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Anchor based methods; Clinical important change; Constant Murley score; Distribution based methods; Minimal important change; Subacromial pain

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONSTANT MURLEY (SCORE); CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; KINESIOTHERAPY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMAL IMPORTANT CHANGE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; ROTATOR CUFF; ROTATOR CUFF RUPTURE; SHOULDER IMPINGEMENT SYNDROME; SHOULDER PAIN; SUBACROMIAL PAIN; HEALTH STATUS INDICATOR; JOINT DISEASES; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN; PAIN MEASUREMENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SHOULDER; TENDON INJURIES;

ADULT; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; JOINT DISEASES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN; PAIN MEASUREMENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; ROC CURVE; ROTATOR CUFF; SHOULDER JOINT; TENDON INJURIES;

EID: 84904793787     PISSN: 10582746     EISSN: 15326500     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.01.014     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Allom R., Colegate-Stone T., Gee M., Ismail M., Sinha J. Outcome analysis of surgery for disorders of the rotator cuff: a comparison of subjective and objective scoring tools. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009, 91:367-373. 10.1302/0301-620X.91B3.20714.
2. Angst F., Goldhahn J., Drerup S., Aeschlimann A., Schwyzer H.K., Simmen B.R. Responsiveness of six outcome assessment instruments in total shoulder arthroplasty. Arthritis Rheum 2008, 59:391-398. 10.1002/art.23318.
3. Cella D., Hahn E.A., Dineen K. Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores: differences between improvement and worsening. Qual Life Res 2002, 11:207-221. 10.1023/A:1015276414526.
4. Constant C.R., Gerber C., Emery R.J., Sojbjerg J.O., Gohlke F., Boileau P. A review of the Constant score: modifications and guidelines for its use. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2008, 17:355-361. 10.1016/j.jse.2007.06.022.
5. Constant C.R., Murley A.H. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987, 160-164.
6. Copay A.G., Subach B.R., Glassman S.D., Polly D.W., Schuler T.C. Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J 2007, 7:541-546. 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.01.008.
7. Crosby R.D., Kolotkin R.L., Williams G.R. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003, 56:395-407. 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00044-1.
8. de Vet H., Terwee C., Mokkink L., Knol D. Measurement in Medicine 2011, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (ISBN No. 9780521133852).
9. de Vet H.C., Ostelo R.W., Terwee C.B., van der Roer N., Knol D.L., Beckerman H., et al. Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach. Qual Life Res 2007, 16:131-142. 10.1007/s11136-006-9109-9.
10. Dupeyron A., Gelis A., Sablayrolles P., Bousquet P.J., Julia M., Herisson C., et al. Heterogeneous assessment of shoulder disorders: validation of the Standardized Index of Shoulder Function. J Rehabil Med 2010, 42:967-972. 10.2340/16501977-0627.
11. Guyatt G.H., Osoba D., Wu A.W., Wyrwich K.W., Norman G.R. Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin Proc 2002, 77:371-383. 10.1016/S0025-6196(11)61793-X.
12. Hagg O., Fritzell P., Oden A., Nordwall A. Simplifying outcome measurement: evaluation of instruments for measuring outcome after fusion surgery for chronic low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa1976) 2002, 27:1213-1222. Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. 10.1097/00007632-200206010-00014.
13. Holmgren T., Bjornsson Hallgren H., Oberg B., Adolfsson L., Johansson K. Effect of specific exercise strategy on need for surgery in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome: randomised controlled study. BMJ 2012, 344:e787. 10.1136/bmj.e787.
14. Kamper S.J., Ostelo R.W., Knol D.L., Maher C.G., de Vet H.C., Hancock M.J. Global Perceived Effect scales provided reliable assessments of health transition in people with musculoskeletal disorders, but ratings are strongly influenced by current status. J ClinEpidemiol 2010, 63:760-766.e1. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.09.009.
15. Kukkonen J., Kauko T., Vahlberg T., Joukainen A., Aarimaa V. Investigating minimal clinically important difference for Constant score in patients undergoing rotator cuff surgery. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2013, 22:1650-1655. 10.1016/j.jse.2013.05.002.
16. Mintken P.E., Glynn P., Cleland J.A. 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.
17. Ostelo R.W., Deyo R.A., Stratford P., Waddell G., Croft P., Von Korff M., et al. Interpreting change scores for pain and functional status in low back pain: towards international consensus regarding minimal important change. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2008, 33:90-94. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815e3a10.
18. Pool J.J., Ostelo R.W., Hoving J.L., Bouter L.M., de Vet H.C. Minimal clinically important change of the Neck Disability Index and the Numerical Rating Scale for patients with neck pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007, 32:3047-3051. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815cf75b.
19. Rocourt M.H., Radlinger L., Kalberer F., Sanavi S., Schmid N.S., Leunig M., et al. Evaluation of intratester and intertester reliability of the Constant-Murley shoulder assessment. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2008, 17:364-369. 10.1016/j.jse.2007.06.024.
20. Roy J.S., MacDermid J.C., Woodhouse L.J. A systematic review of the psychometric properties of the Constant-Murley score. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010, 19:157-164. 10.1016/j.jse.2009.04.008.
21. Roy J.S., MacDermid J.C., Woodhouse L.J. Measuring shoulder function: a systematic review of four questionnaires. Arthritis Rheum 2009, 61:623-632. 10.1002/art.24396.
22. Tashjian R.Z., Deloach J., Porucznik C.A., Powell A.P. Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for visual analog scales (VAS) measuring pain in patients treated for rotator cuff disease. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2009, 18:927-932. 10.1016/j.jse.2009.03.021.
23. van Kampen D.A., Willems W.J., van Beers L.W., Castelein R.M., Scholtes V.A., Terwee C.B. Determination and comparison of the smallest detectable change (SDC) and the minimal important change (MIC) of four-shoulder patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). J Orthop Surg Res 2013, 8:40. 10.1186/1749-799X-8-40.