Minimum clinically important difference of the health-related quality of life scales in adult spinal deformity calculated by latent class analysis: is it appropriate to use the same values for surgical and nonsurgical patients?

Spine Journal

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2019, Pages 71-78

  Yuksel, Selcen ^a   Ayhan, Selim ^b,c   Nabiyev, Vugar ^b   Domingo Sabat, Montse ^d   Vila Casademunt, Alba ^d   Obeid, Ibrahim ^e   Perez Grueso, Francisco Sanchez ^f   Acaroglu, Emre ^g  

^a YILDIRIM BEYAZIT UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b Spine and Spinal Cord Surgery   (Turkey)

^c ACIBADEM UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^d HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARI VALL D HEBRON   (Spain)

^e BORDEAUX UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

^f HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO LA PAZ   (Spain)

^g Turkey   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Adult spinal deformity; COMI; MCID; MDC; ODI; Outcome; SF 36; SRS 22R; Surgery

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORE OUTCOME MEASURES INDEX; DATA BASE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LATENT CLASS ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MENTAL COMPONENT SUMMARY SCORE; MIDDLE AGED; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; PHYSICAL COMPONENT SUMMARY SCORE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY OF LIFE ASSESSMENT; SCOLIOSIS RESEARCH SOCIETY 22R SCORE; SCORING SYSTEM; SHORT FORM 36; SPINE MALFORMATION; SPINE SURGERY;

EID: 85052322060     PISSN: 15299430     EISSN: 18781632     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.07.005     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bridwell, KH, Cats-Baril, W, Harrast, J, Berven, S, Glassman, S, Farcy, JP, et al. The validity of the SRS-22 instrument in an adult spinal deformity population compared with the Oswestry and SF-12: a study of response distribution, concurrent validity, internal consistency, and reliability. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:4 (2005 Feb 15), 455–461 PubMed PMID:15706344.
2. Fairbank, JC, Couper, J, Davies, JB, O'Brien, JP, The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66:8 (1980), 271–273.
3. Mannion, AF, Vila-Casademunt, A, Domingo-Sàbat, M, Wunderlin, S, Pellisé, F, Bago, J, et al. The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) is a responsive instrument for assessing the outcome of treatment for adult spinal deformity. Eur Spine J 25:8 (2016 Aug), 2638–2648, 10.1007/s00586-015-4292-4 PubMed PMID: 26519374.
4. Walsh, TL, Hanscom, B, Lurie, JD, Weinstein, JN, Is a condition-specific instrument for patients with low back pain/leg symptoms really necessary? The responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index, MODEMS, and the SF-36. Spine 28:6 (2003), 607–615.
5. Jaeschke, R, Singer, J, Guyatt, GH, Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controll Clin Trials 10:4 (1989), 407–415.
6. Beaton, DE, Boers, M, Wells, GA, Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol 14:2 (2002), 109–114.
7. Chung, AS, Copay, AG, Olmscheid, N, Campbell, D, Walker, JB, Chutkan, N, Minimum clinically important difference: current trends in the spine literature. Spine 42:14 (2017), 1096–1105.
8. International Spine Study Group, McCarthy, I, Bess, S, Line, B, O'Brien, M, Schwab, F J, et al. Calculating and Defining Minimally Important Clinical Difference (MCID) and Substantial Clinical Benefit (SCB) Values for Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD): A Robust Methodology for Consistent Data Reporting. Spine J, 13(9), 2013 75S.
9. 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 8:6 (2008), 968–974.
10. Crawford, CH 3rd, Glassman, SD, Bridwell, KH, Berven, SH, Carreon, LY, The minimum clinically important difference in SRS-22R total score, appearance, activity and pain domains after surgical treatment of adult spinal deformity. Spine 40:6 (2015), 377–381.
11. Gum, JL, Glassman, SD, Carreon, LY, Clinically important deterioration in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery: a choice of evaluation methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, and pain scales: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 19:5 (2013), 564–568.
12. Bago, J, Perez-Grueso, FJ, Les, E, Hernandez, P, Pellise, F, Minimal important differences of the SRS-22 Patient Questionnaire following surgical treatment of idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 18:12 (2009), 1898–1904.
13. Wells, G, Beaton, D, Shea, B, Boers, M, Simon, L, Strand, V, et al. Minimal clinically important differences: review of methods. The Journal of Rheumatology 28:2 (February 2001), 406–412.
14. de Vet, HC, Terwee, CB, Knol, DL, Bouter, LM, When to use agreement versus reliability measures. J Clin Epidemiol 59:10 (2006), 1033–1039.
15. Team RDC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. http://www.R-project.org, 2008 Accessed August 1, 2017.
16. Acaroglu, E, Yavuz, AC, Guler, UO, Yuksel, S, Yavuz, Y, Domingo-Sabat, M, et al. A decision analysis to identify the ideal treatment for adult spinal deformity: is surgery better than non-surgical treatment in improving health-related quality of life and decreasing the disease burden?. Eur Spine J 25:8 (2016 Aug), 2390–2400, 10.1007/s00586-016-4413-8 PubMed PMID: 26821143.
17. Bridwell, KH, Glassman, S, Horton, W, Shaffrey, C, Schwab, F, Zebala, LP, et al. Does treatment (nonoperative and operative) improve the two-year quality of life in patients with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis: a prospective multicenter evidence-based medicine study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:20 (2009 Sep 15), 2171–2178, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a8fdc8 PubMed PMID: 19752703.
18. Carreon, LY, Bratcher, KR, Canan, CE, Burke, LO, Djurasovic, M, Glassman, SD, Differentiating minimum clinically important difference for primary and revision lumbar fusion surgeries. J Neurosurg Spine 18:1 (2013), 102–106.
19. Parker, SL, Mendenhall, SK, Shau, D, Adogwa, O, Cheng, JS, Anderson, WN, et al. Determination of minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after extension of fusion for adjacent- segment disease. J Neurosurg Spine 16:1 (2012 Jan), 61–67, 10.3171/2011.8.SPINE1194 PubMed PMID: 21962034.
20. Parker, SL, Adogwa, O, Mendenhall, SK, Shau, DN, Anderson, WN, Cheng, JS, et al. Determination of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in pain, disability, and quality of life after revision fusion for symptomatic pseudoarthrosis. Spine J 12:12 (2012 Dec), 1122–1128, 10.1016/j.spinee.2012.10.006 PubMed PMID: 23158968.