Minimal Clinically Important Difference of the Functional Gait Assessment in Older Adults

被引:58
作者
Beninato, Marianne [1 ]
Fernandes, Arlene [2 ]
Plummer, Laura S. [3 ]
机构
[1] CNY, MGH Inst Hlth Profess, Grad Programs Phys Therapy, Boston, MA 02129 USA
[2] Brookline Healthcare Ctr, Brookline, MA USA
[3] MGH Inst Hlth Profess, Boston, MA USA
来源
PHYSICAL THERAPY | 2014年 / 94卷 / 11期
关键词
QUALITY-OF-LIFE; BACK PAIN QUESTIONNAIRE; DIAGNOSTIC-TEST; CLINICIAN PERSPECTIVES; VESTIBULAR DISORDERS; DETECTABLE CHANGE; PHYSICAL-THERAPY; HEALTH-STATUS; PATIENT; STROKE;
D O I
10.2522/ptj.20130596
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background. The Functional Gait Assessment (FGA) is commonly used to measure walking balance. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) has yet to be determined for the FGA. Objective. The purposes of this study were to determine: (1) the MCID in the FGA for older community-dwelling adults relative to patients' and physical therapists' estimates of change and (2) the extent of agreement between patients' and physical therapists' estimates of change. Design. This study was a prospective case series. Methods. Patients and physical therapists rated the amount of change in balance while walking after an episode of physical therapy for balance retraining on a 15-point global rating of change (GROC) scale. Weighted kappa statistics were calculated to express agreement between patients' and physical therapists' GROC ratings. Functional Gait Assessment change scores were plotted on receiver operating characteristic curves. A cutoff of +3 on the GROC was the criterion used for important change. The optimal FGA change cutoff score for MCID was determined, and sensitivity (SN), specificity (SP), and likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated. Results. One hundred thirty-five community-dwelling older adults (average age = 78.8 years) and 14 physical therapists participated. There was poor agreement between the patients' and therapists' ratings of change (weighted kappa = .163). The estimated MCID value for the FGA using physical therapists' ratings of change as an anchor was 4 points (SN = 0.66, SP = 0.84, LR+ = 4.07, LR = 0.40). No accurate value for the FGA MCID could be determined based on the patients' ratings of change. Limitations. The small sample size was a limitation. Conclusion. Poor agreement between therapists' and patients' ratings indicate the need for further communication relative to patient goals. The 4-point MCID value for the FGA can be used for goal setting, tracking patient progress, and program evaluation.
引用
收藏
页码:1594 / 1603
页数:10
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
Beaton DE, 2001, ARTHRIT RHEUM-ARTHR, V45, P270, DOI 10.1002/1529-0131(200106)45:3<270::AID-ART260>3.0.CO
[2]  
2-T
[3]   Determination of the minimal clinically important difference in the FIM instrument in patients with stroke [J].
Beninato, M ;
Gill-Body, KM ;
Salles, S ;
Stark, PC ;
Black-Schaffer, RM ;
Stein, J .
ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2006, 87 (01) :32-39
[4]   Applying Concepts of Responsiveness to Patient Management in Neurologic Physical Therapy [J].
Beninato, Marianne ;
Portney, Leslie G. .
JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGIC PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2011, 35 (02) :75-81
[5]   A prospective global measure, the Punum Ladder, provides more valid assessments of quality of life than a retrospective transition measure [J].
Fletcher, Kenneth E. ;
French, Cynthia T. ;
Irwin, Richard S. ;
Corapi, Kristin M. ;
Norman, Geoffrey R. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2010, 63 (10) :1123-1131
[6]   Estimating Clinically Important Change in Gait Speed in People With Stroke Undergoing Outpatient Rehabilitation [J].
Fulk, George D. ;
Ludwig, Miriam ;
Dunning, Kari ;
Golden, Sue ;
Boyne, Pierce ;
West, Trent .
JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGIC PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2011, 35 (02) :82-89
[7]   Interpreting change scores of tests and measures used in physical therapy [J].
Haley, SM ;
Fragala-Pinkham, MA .
PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2006, 86 (05) :735-743
[8]   The concept of clinically meaningful difference in health-related quality-of-life research - How meaningful is it? [J].
Hays, RD ;
Woolley, JM .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2000, 18 (05) :419-423
[9]  
Hosmer W., 2000, Applied Logistic Regression, VSecond
[10]  
JACOBSON GP, 1990, ARCH OTOLARYNGOL, V116, P424