The minimal clinically important difference of the motricity index score

被引:3
作者
Lin, Chen [1 ]
Arevalo, Yurany A. [1 ]
Harvey, Richard L. [2 ]
Prabhakaran, Shyam [3 ]
Martin, Kimberly D. [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Alabama Birmingham, Dept Neurol, Birmingham, AL 35294 USA
[2] Northwestern Univ, Dept Phys Med & Rehabil, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[3] Univ Chicago, Dept Neurol, 5841 S Maryland Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[4] Univ Alabama Birmingham, Dept Epidemiol, Birmingham, AL 35294 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Stroke rehabilitation; stroke outcomes; minimal clinically important difference; motricity index; upper limb; functional outcome measure; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; FUGL-MEYER ASSESSMENT; UPPER-EXTREMITY; HEALTH-STATUS; STROKE; IMPAIRMENT; RECOVERY; RELIABILITY;
D O I
10.1080/10749357.2022.2031532
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
Introduction The Motricity Index (MI) can predict motor function after rehabilitation, but its minimal clinically important difference (MCID) has not been established. The primary study aim was to estimate the MCID value of the MI arm score. Methods Between 2017 and 2018, 173 participants hospitalized with confirmed ischemic stroke were recruited into an observational rehabilitation study. Participants with motor weakness as measured by the Fugl-Meyer upper-extremity (FM-UE) and MI with complete baseline and follow-up assessments at 3 months were included in this analysis. The longitudinal recovery of the MI arm score was anchored to having a poor outcome based on the FM-UE recovery (<9) longitudinally. Results reported include the area-under-curve (AUC), along with sensitivity, specificity, and optimal cut-points based on maximizing the Youden statistic. Results Sixty-nine patients (median [IQR] age 70 [18] years; 48% male; 54% white) were included in the final analysis. Mean +/- standard deviation outcome scores at 3-months were: MI arm: 83.19 +/- 22.80; FM-UE: 53.04 +/- 17.26. For the primary results, the MI arm score optimal MCID cutoff for observed recovery was 13 points with a sensitivity of 80% (95% Confidence Interval (CI)(67.6%, 92.4%)) and a specificity of 69.0% (95% CI (52.1, 85.8%)), and the AUC was 0.8082 (0.7007, 0.9157). Conclusions This was the first study to report the MCID of the MI arm score, as anchored to the FM-UE recovery between acute evaluation and 3-months. The estimated optimal MCID of improvement in the MI arm score was 13 points.
引用
收藏
页码:298 / 303
页数:6
相关论文
共 26 条
  • [1] Estimating the Minimal Clinically Important Difference of an Upper Extremity Recovery Measure in Subacute Stroke Patients
    Arya, Kamal Narayan
    Verma, Rajesh
    Garg, R. K.
    [J]. TOPICS IN STROKE REHABILITATION, 2011, 18 : 599 - 610
  • [2] Issues in Selecting Outcome Measures to Assess Functional Recovery After Stroke
    Barak S.
    Duncan P.W.
    [J]. NeuroRX, 2006, 3 (4): : 505 - 524
  • [3] ASSESSING MOTOR IMPAIRMENT AFTER STROKE - A PILOT RELIABILITY STUDY
    COLLIN, C
    WADE, D
    [J]. JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY NEUROSURGERY AND PSYCHIATRY, 1990, 53 (07) : 576 - 579
  • [4] Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change
    de Vet, Henrica C.
    Terwee, Caroline B.
    Ostelo, Raymond W.
    Beckerman, Heleen
    Knol, Dirk L.
    Bouter, Lex M.
    [J]. HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2006, 4 (1)
  • [5] Fayazi Maryam, 2012, Med J Islam Repub Iran, V26, P27
  • [6] Improving the reliability of stroke subgroup classification using the Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) criteria
    Goldstein, LB
    Jones, MR
    Matchar, DB
    Edwards, LJ
    Hoff, J
    Chilukuri, V
    Armstrong, SB
    Horner, RD
    [J]. STROKE, 2001, 32 (05) : 1091 - 1096
  • [7] The concept of clinically meaningful difference in health-related quality-of-life research - How meaningful is it?
    Hays, RD
    Woolley, JM
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2000, 18 (05) : 419 - 423
  • [8] Hiragami Shogo, 2019, J Phys Ther Sci, V31, P917, DOI 10.1589/jpts.31.917
  • [9] Inter-rater reliability and validity of the Action Research arm test in stroke patients
    Hsieh, CL
    Hsueh, IP
    Chiang, FM
    Lin, PH
    [J]. AGE AND AGEING, 1998, 27 (02) : 107 - 114
  • [10] MEASUREMENT OF HEALTH-STATUS - ASCERTAINING THE MINIMAL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE
    JAESCHKE, R
    SINGER, J
    GUYATT, GH
    [J]. CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1989, 10 (04): : 407 - 415