Estimating the minimal clinically important difference for balance and gait outcome measures in individuals with vestibular disorders

被引:16
作者
Wellons, Rachel D. [1 ]
Duhe, Sydney E. [2 ]
MacDowell, Sara G. [2 ]
Hodge, April [3 ]
Oxborough, Sara [4 ]
Levitzky, Elizabeth E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Louisiana State Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr, New Orleans, LA USA
[2] Our Lady Lake Hearing & Balance Ctr, Baton Rouge, LA USA
[3] Shepherd Ctr, Atlanta, GA USA
[4] Natl Dizzy & Balance Ctr, Bloomington, MN USA
来源
JOURNAL OF VESTIBULAR RESEARCH-EQUILIBRIUM & ORIENTATION | 2022年 / 32卷 / 03期
关键词
Minimal clinically important difference; activities-specific balance confidence scale; functional gait assessment; gait speed; vestibular disorders; WALKING SPEED; HEALTH-STATUS; RESPONSIVENESS; REHABILITATION; DIZZINESS; PERFORMANCE; SCALE; COMMUNITY; VERTIGO; ADULTS;
D O I
10.3233/VES-201630
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Vestibular Rehabilitation Therapists (VRT) utilize outcome measures to quantify gait and balance abilities in individuals with vestibular disorders (IVD). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in gait and balance outcome measures for IVD is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to estimate the MCID of the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC), Functional Gait Assessment (FGA), and Gait Speed (GS) using distribution and anchor-based methods relative to the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) in IVD. METHODS: Data were collected using a retrospective chart review from two outpatient Vestibular Rehabilitation (VR) clinics. Data included demographic characteristics, diagnosis, VR course, and pre and post outcome measures including DHI, ABC, FGA, and GS. The DHI was used to classify subjects as "responders" or "non-responders" in order to calculate MCID values. RESULTS: The total number of subjects analyzed for each outcome measure was 222 for the ABC, 220 for FGA, and 237 for GS. Subjects made statistically significant improvements in ABC, DHI, FGA, and GS (p < 0.001) from pre to post VR. The MCID calculated for ABC, FGA, and GS using the anchor-based approach was 18.1%, 4 points, and 0.09 m/s respectively. The MCIDs calculated using distribution-based approach for the ABC ranged between 7.5-23.5%, FGA ranged between 1.31-4.15 points, and GS ranged between 0.07 m/s-0.22 m/s. CONCLUSIONS: The anchor-based calculations of the MCID of 18.1%, 4 points, and 0.09 m/s for ABC, FGA, and GS respectively for IVD should be used over distribution-based calculations. This is due to strength of DHI as the anchor and statistical analysis. VRT and researches can use these values to indicate meaningful changes in gait and balance function in IVD.
引用
收藏
页码:223 / 233
页数:11
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]   Vestibular dysfunction: Prevalence, impact and need for targeted treatment [J].
Agrawal, Yuri ;
Ward, Bryan K. ;
Minor, Lloyd B. .
JOURNAL OF VESTIBULAR RESEARCH-EQUILIBRIUM & ORIENTATION, 2013, 23 (03) :113-117
[2]   Health status instruments for patients with COPD in pulmonary rehabilitation: defining a minimal clinically important difference [J].
Alma, Harma ;
de Jong, Corina ;
Jelusic, Danijel ;
Wittmann, Michael ;
Schuler, Michael ;
Flokstra-de Blok, Bertine ;
Kocks, Janwillem ;
Schultz, Konrad ;
van der Molen, Thys .
NPJ PRIMARY CARE RESPIRATORY MEDICINE, 2016, 26
[3]   Minimal Clinically Important Difference of the Functional Gait Assessment in Older Adults [J].
Beninato, Marianne ;
Fernandes, Arlene ;
Plummer, Laura S. .
PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2014, 94 (11) :1594-1603
[4]   Clinical Practice Guideline: Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (Update) [J].
Bhattacharyya, Neil ;
Gubbels, Samuel P. ;
Schwartz, Seth R. ;
Edlow, Jonathan A. ;
El-Kashlan, Hussam ;
Fife, Terry ;
Holmberg, Janene M. ;
Mahoney, Kathryn ;
Hollingsworth, Deena B. ;
Roberts, Richard ;
Seidman, Michael D. ;
Steiner, Robert W. Prasaad ;
Do, Betty Tsai ;
Voelker, Courtney C. J. ;
Waguespack, Richard W. ;
Corrigan, Maureen D. .
OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, 2017, 156 :S1-S47
[5]   Minimal clinically important difference for change in comfortable gait speed of adults with pathology: a systematic review [J].
Bohannon, Richard W. ;
Glenney, Susan S. .
JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2014, 20 (04) :295-300
[6]   Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods [J].
Copay, Anne G. ;
Subach, Brian R. ;
Glassman, Steven D. ;
Polly, David W., Jr. ;
Schuler, Thomas C. .
SPINE JOURNAL, 2007, 7 (05) :541-546
[7]   Vestibular rehabilitation: advances in peripheral and central vestibular disorders [J].
Dunlap, Pamela M. ;
Holmberg, Janene M. ;
Whitney, Susan L. .
CURRENT OPINION IN NEUROLOGY, 2019, 32 (01) :137-144
[8]   Minimal Clinically Important Difference A Review of Outcome Measure Score Interpretation [J].
Engel, Lisa ;
Beaton, Dorcas E. ;
Touma, Zahi .
RHEUMATIC DISEASE CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2018, 44 (02) :177-+
[9]   Responsiveness of Self-Report Measures in Individuals With Vertigo, Dizziness, and Unsteadiness [J].
Friscia, Lauren A. ;
Morgan, Michael T. ;
Sparto, Patrick J. ;
Furman, Joseph M. ;
Whitney, Susan L. .
OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2014, 35 (05) :884-888
[10]   Assessing walking speed in clinical research: a systematic review [J].
Graham, James E. ;
Ostir, Glenn V. ;
Fisher, Steven R. ;
Ottenbacher, Kenneth J. .
JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2008, 14 (04) :552-562