Measuring Surgical Outcomes in Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Assessment of Minimum Clinically Important Difference

被引:63
作者
Auffinger, Brenda M. [1 ]
Lall, Rishi R. [2 ]
Dahdaleh, Nader S. [2 ]
Wong, Albert P. [2 ]
Lam, Sandi K. [1 ]
Koski, Tyler [2 ]
Fessler, Richard G. [2 ]
Smith, Zachary A. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Chicago, Sect Neurol Surg, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[2] Northwestern Univ, Dept Neurol Surg, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
来源
PLOS ONE | 2013年 / 8卷 / 06期
关键词
NECK-DISABILITY-INDEX; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; BACK PAIN QUESTIONNAIRE; INTRAINDIVIDUAL CHANGES; HEALTH-STATUS; ARTICLE; RELIABILITY; SENSITIVITY; VALIDITY; STATE;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0067408
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Object: The concept of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) has been used to measure the threshold by which the effect of a specific treatment can be considered clinically meaningful. MCID has previously been studied in surgical patients, however few studies have assessed its role in spinal surgery. The goal of this study was to assess the role of MCID in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Methods: Data was collected on 30 patients who underwent ACDF for CSM between 2007 and 2012. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual-Analog Scale (VAS), and Short Form-36 (SF-36) Physical (PCS) and Mental (MCS) Component Summary PRO scores were collected. Five distribution- and anchor-based approaches were used to calculate MCID threshold values average change, change difference, receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), minimum detectable change (MDC) and standard error of measurement (SEM). The Health Transition Item of the SF-36 (HTI) was used as an external anchor. Results: Patients had a significant improvement in all mean physical PRO scores postoperatively (p<0.01) NDI (29.24 to 14.82), VAS (5.06 to 1.72), and PCS (36.98 to 44.22). The five MCID approaches yielded a range of values for each PRO: 2.00-8.78 for PCS, 2.06-5.73 for MCS, 4.83-13.39 for NDI, and 0.36-3.11 for VAS. PCS was the most representative PRO measure, presenting the greatest area under the ROC curve (0.94). MDC values were not affected by the choice of anchor and their threshold of improvement was statistically greater than the chance of error from unimproved patients. Conclusion: SF-36 PCS was the most representative PRO measure. MDC appears to be the most appropriate MCID method. When MDC was applied together with HTI anchor, the MCID thresholds were: 13.39 for NDI, 3.11 for VAS, 5.56 for PCS and 5.73 for MCS.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Beaton DE, 2001, J RHEUMATOL, V28, P400
  • [2] 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
    Carreon, Leah Y.
    Glassman, Steven D.
    Campbell, Mitchell J.
    Anderson, Paul A.
    [J]. SPINE JOURNAL, 2010, 10 (06) : 469 - 474
  • [3] 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
    Copay, Anne G.
    Glassman, Steven D.
    Subach, Brian R.
    Berven, Sigurd
    Schuler, Thomas C.
    Carreon, Leah Y.
    [J]. SPINE JOURNAL, 2008, 8 (06) : 968 - 974
  • [4] Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods
    Copay, Anne G.
    Subach, Brian R.
    Glassman, Steven D.
    Polly, David W., Jr.
    Schuler, Thomas C.
    [J]. SPINE JOURNAL, 2007, 7 (05) : 541 - 546
  • [5] Prospective validation of clinically important changes in pain severity measured on a visual analog scale
    Gallagher, EJ
    Liebman, M
    Bijur, PE
    [J]. ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2001, 38 (06) : 633 - 638
  • [6] Testing minimal clinically important difference: consensus or conundrum?
    Gatchel, Robert J.
    Mayer, Tom G.
    [J]. SPINE JOURNAL, 2010, 10 (04) : 321 - 327
  • [7] The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain
    Hägg, O
    Fritzell, P
    Nordwall, A
    [J]. EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2003, 12 (01) : 12 - 20
  • [8] USERS GUIDES TO THE MEDICAL LITERATURE .3. HOW TO USE AN ARTICLE ABOUT A DIAGNOSTIC-TEST .B. WHAT ARE THE RESULTS AND WILL THEY HELP ME IN CARING FOR MY PATIENTS
    JAESCHKE, R
    GUYATT, GH
    SACKETT, DL
    GUYATT, G
    BASS, E
    BRILLEDWARDS, P
    BROWMAN, G
    COOK, D
    FARKOUH, M
    GERSTEIN, H
    HAYNES, B
    HAYWARD, R
    HOLBROOK, A
    JUNIPER, E
    LEE, H
    LEVINE, M
    MOYER, V
    NISHIKAWA, J
    OXMAN, A
    PATEL, A
    PHILBRICK, J
    RICHARDSON, WS
    SAUVE, S
    SACKETT, D
    SINCLAIR, J
    TROUT, KS
    TUGWELL, P
    TUNIS, S
    WALTER, S
    WILSON, M
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1994, 271 (09): : 703 - 707
  • [9] 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
  • [10] CORRELATES OF IMPROVEMENT IN MULTIDISCIPLINARY TREATMENT OF CHRONIC PAIN
    JENSEN, MP
    TURNER, JA
    ROMANO, JM
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CONSULTING AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1994, 62 (01) : 172 - 179