Minimal (clinically) important differences for the Fatigue Assessment Scale in sarcoidosis

被引:99
|
作者
de Kleijn, Willemien P. E. [1 ,2 ]
De Vries, Jolanda [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Wijnen, Petal A. H. M. [2 ,4 ]
Drent, Marjolein [2 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Tilburg Univ, Dept Med Psychol, Ctr Res Psychol Somat Dis CoRPS, NL-5000 LE Tilburg, Netherlands
[2] Maastricht Univ, Med Ctr, Ild Care Team, Maastricht, Netherlands
[3] St Elizabeth Hosp, Dept Med Psychol, Tilburg, Netherlands
[4] Maastricht Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Clin Chem, Maastricht, Netherlands
[5] Maastricht Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Resp Med, Maastricht, Netherlands
关键词
Sarcoidosis; Minimal clinically important difference; Fatigue; Fatigue Assessment Scale; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; HEALTH-STATUS; INTRAINDIVIDUAL CHANGES; MEANINGFUL CHANGE; RESPONSIVENESS; FIBROSIS; ANCHOR; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.rmed.2011.05.004
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective: The usefulness of any questionnaire in clinical management and research trials depends on its ability to indicate a likelihood of treatment success during follow-up. The Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) reflects a clinically relevant change score. The aim of this study was to estimate the MCID for the Fatigue Assessment Scale (FAS) in patients with sarcoidosis. Methods: Outpatients (n = 321) of the ild care team of the Department of Respiratory Medicine of the Maastricht University Medical Centre, The Netherlands, participated in this prospective follow-up study. Anchor-based and distribution-based methods were used to estimate the MCID. Based on the anchor Physical Quality of Life, a Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) was obtained. The distribution-based methods consisted of the Effect Size and Standard Error Measurement (SEM). Results: The anchor-based MCID found with ROC was 3.5. The distribution-based methods showed that the corresponding change scores in the FAS for a small effect was 4.2. The SEM criterion was 3.6 points change in the FAS. Conclusions: Based on the anchor-based and distribution-based methods, the MCID is a 4-point difference on the FAS. This MCID can be used in the follow-up of fatigue (FAS) in clinical trials and in the management of individual sarcoidosis cases. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1388 / 1395
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Validation of the minimal clinically important difference for modified activities assessment scale
    Neela, Niharika
    Olavarria, Oscar A.
    Rondon, Alexis P.
    Bernardi, Karla
    Shah, Puja
    Dhanani, Naila
    Lyons, Nicole
    Matta, Eduardo J.
    Hasapes, Joseph P.
    Liang, Mike K.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2022, 223 (04) : 770 - 773
  • [22] The Wisconsin gait scale - The minimal clinically important difference
    Guzik, Agnieszka
    Druzbickia, Mariusz
    Wolan-Nieroda, Andzelina
    Przysada, Grzegorz
    Kwolek, Andrzej
    GAIT & POSTURE, 2019, 68 : 453 - 457
  • [23] Minimal Clinically Important Differences for Measures of Pain, Lung Function, Fatigue, and Functionality in Spinal Cord Injury
    Sobreira, Margarida
    Almeida, Miguel P.
    Gomes, Ana
    Lucas, Marlene
    Oliveira, Ana
    Marques, Alda
    PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2021, 101 (02):
  • [24] Establishing Thresholds for Minimal Clinically Important Differences for the Peripheral Artery Disease Questionnaire
    Peri-Okonny, Poghni A.
    Wang, Jingyan
    Gosch, Kensey L.
    Patel, Manesh R.
    Shishehbor, Mehdi H.
    Safley, David L.
    Abbott, J. Dawn
    Aronow, Herbert D.
    Mena-Hurtado, Carlos
    Jelani, Qurat-Ul-Ain
    Tang, Yuanyuan
    Bunte, Matthew
    Labrosciano, Clementine
    Beltrame, John F.
    Spertus, John A.
    Smolderen, Kim G.
    CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR QUALITY AND OUTCOMES, 2021, 14 (05): : E007232
  • [25] Total knee replacement; minimal clinically important differences and responders
    Escobar, A.
    Garcia Perez, L.
    Herrera-Espineira, C.
    Aizpuru, F.
    Sarasqueta, C.
    Saenz de Tejada, M. Gonzalez
    Quintana, J. M.
    Bilbao, A.
    OSTEOARTHRITIS AND CARTILAGE, 2013, 21 (12) : 2006 - 2012
  • [26] Minimal clinically important differences in nasal peak inspiratory flow
    Timperley, Daniel
    Srubisky, Aviva
    Stow, Nicholas
    Marcells, George N.
    Harvey, Richard J.
    RHINOLOGY, 2011, 49 (01) : 37 - 40
  • [27] Minimal and robust clinically important difference of three fatigue measures in chronic stroke survivors
    Cheraghifard, Moslem
    Sarlak, Nazanin
    Taghizadeh, Ghorban
    Azad, Akram
    Fallah, Soheila
    Akbarfahimi, Malahat
    TOPICS IN STROKE REHABILITATION, 2023, 30 (05) : 522 - 531
  • [28] Determining the minimal clinically important difference criteria for the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory in a radiotherapy population
    Purcell, Amanda
    Fleming, Jennifer
    Bennett, Sally
    Burmeister, Bryan
    Haines, Terry
    SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2010, 18 (03) : 307 - 315
  • [29] Minimal clinically important difference for 7 measures of fatigue in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus
    Goligher, Ewan C.
    Pouchot, Jacques
    Brant, Rollin
    Kherani, Raheem B.
    Avina-Zubieta, J. Antonio
    Lacaille, Diane
    Lehman, Allen J.
    Ensworth, Stephanie
    Kopec, Jacek
    Esdaile, John M.
    Liang, Matthew H.
    JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY, 2008, 35 (04) : 635 - 642
  • [30] Minimal clinically important differences after subpectoral biceps tenodesis: definition and retrospective assessment of predictive factors
    Eguia, Francisco A.
    Ali, Iman
    Bansal, Ankit
    McFarland, Edward G.
    Srikumaran, Uma
    JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2020, 29 (07) : S41 - S47