OBJECTIVE: To estimate the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for several pain measures obtained from the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) for patients with fibromyalgia. METHODS: Data were pooled across 12-week treatment periods from 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of duloxetine for the treatment of fibromyalgia. Each study enrolled subjects with American College of Rheumatology--defined fibromyalgia who presented with moderate to severe pain. The MCIDs for the BPI average pain item score and the BPI severity score (the mean of the BPI pain scale values: right now, average, least, and worst) were estimated by anchoring against the Patient's Global Impressions of Improvement scale. RESULTS: The anchor-based MCIDs for the BPI average pain item and severity scores were 2.1 and 2.2 points, respectively. These MCIDs correspond to 32.3% and 34.2% reductions from baseline in scores. CONCLUSION: In these analyses, the MCIDs for several pain measures obtained from the BPI were similar (∼2 points) and corresponded to a 30-35% improvement from baseline to end point. These findings may be beneficial for use in designing clinical trials in which the BPI is used to evaluate improvements in pain severity.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for several pain measures obtained from the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) for patients with fibromyalgia. METHODS: Data were pooled across 12-week treatment periods from 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of duloxetine for the treatment of fibromyalgia. Each study enrolled subjects with American College of Rheumatology--defined fibromyalgia who presented with moderate to severe pain. The MCIDs for the BPI average pain item score and the BPI severity score (the mean of the BPI pain scale values: right now, average, least, and worst) were estimated by anchoring against the Patient's Global Impressions of Improvement scale. RESULTS: The anchor-based MCIDs for the BPI average pain item and severity scores were 2.1 and 2.2 points, respectively. These MCIDs correspond to 32.3% and 34.2% reductions from baseline in scores. CONCLUSION: In these analyses, the MCIDs for several pain measures obtained from the BPI were similar (∼2 points) and corresponded to a 30-35% improvement from baseline to end point. These findings may be beneficial for use in designing clinical trials in which the BPI is used to evaluate improvements in pain severity.
Authors: Lesley M Arnold; David A Williams; James I Hudson; Susan A Martin; Daniel J Clauw; Leslie J Crofford; Fujun Wang; Birol Emir; Chinglin Lai; Rong Zablocki; Philip J Mease Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2012-03
Authors: M Diane McKee; Benjamin Kligler; Jason Fletcher; Francesca Biryukov; William Casalaina; Belinda Anderson; Arthur Blank Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2013 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Ellen M Lavoie Smith; Herbert Pang; Constance Cirrincione; Stewart Fleishman; Electra D Paskett; Tim Ahles; Linda R Bressler; Camilo E Fadul; Chetaye Knox; Nguyet Le-Lindqwister; Paul B Gilman; Charles L Shapiro Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Anthony S Kaleth; Chandan K Saha; Mark P Jensen; James E Slaven; Dennis C Ang Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: John W Barrington; Roger H Emerson; Scott T Lovald; Adolph V Lombardi; Keith R Berend Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Kim D Jones; Christy A Sherman; Scott D Mist; James W Carson; Robert M Bennett; Fuzhong Li Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2012-05-13 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Matthew C Mauck; Chloe E Barton; Andrew S Tungate; Jeffrey W Shupp; Rachel Karlnoski; David J Smith; Felicia N Williams; Samuel W Jones; Christopher Sefton; Kyle McGrath; Bruce A Cairns; Samuel A McLean Journal: J Burn Care Res Date: 2022-01-05 Impact factor: 1.845