OBJECTIVE: To critically and systematically review methods used to estimate the smallest worthwhile effect of interventions for nonspecific low back pain. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A computerized search was conducted of MEDLINE, CINAHL, LILACS, and EMBASE up to May 2011. Studies were included if they were primary reports intended to measure the smallest worthwhile effect of a health intervention (although they did not need to use this terminology) for nonspecific low back pain. RESULTS: The search located 31 studies, which provided a total of 129 estimates of the smallest worthwhile effect. The estimates were given a variety of names, including the Minimum Clinically Important Difference, Minimum Important Difference, Minimum Worthwhile Reductions, and Minimum Important Change. Most estimates were obtained using anchor- or distribution-based methods. These methods are not (or not directly) based on patients' perceptions, are not intervention-specific, and are not formulated in terms of differences in outcomes with and without intervention. CONCLUSION: The methods used to estimate the smallest worthwhile effect of interventions for low back pain have important limitations. We recommend that the benefit-harm trade-off method be used to estimate the smallest worthwhile effects of intervention because it overcomes these limitations.
OBJECTIVE: To critically and systematically review methods used to estimate the smallest worthwhile effect of interventions for nonspecific low back pain. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A computerized search was conducted of MEDLINE, CINAHL, LILACS, and EMBASE up to May 2011. Studies were included if they were primary reports intended to measure the smallest worthwhile effect of a health intervention (although they did not need to use this terminology) for nonspecific low back pain. RESULTS: The search located 31 studies, which provided a total of 129 estimates of the smallest worthwhile effect. The estimates were given a variety of names, including the Minimum Clinically Important Difference, Minimum Important Difference, Minimum Worthwhile Reductions, and Minimum Important Change. Most estimates were obtained using anchor- or distribution-based methods. These methods are not (or not directly) based on patients' perceptions, are not intervention-specific, and are not formulated in terms of differences in outcomes with and without intervention. CONCLUSION: The methods used to estimate the smallest worthwhile effect of interventions for low back pain have important limitations. We recommend that the benefit-harm trade-off method be used to estimate the smallest worthwhile effects of intervention because it overcomes these limitations.
Authors: David A T Werner; Margreth Grotle; Sasha Gulati; Ivar M Austevoll; Greger Lønne; Øystein P Nygaard; Tore K Solberg Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2017-06-14 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Jason M Beneciuk; Jonathan C Hill; Paul Campbell; Ebenezer Afolabi; Steven Z George; Kate M Dunn; Nadine E Foster Journal: J Pain Date: 2016-10-17 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: Marcia Rodrigues Franco; Manuela L Ferreira; Kirsten Howard; Catherine Sherrington; John Rose; Terry P Haines; Paulo Ferreira Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2013-02-05 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Stephanie Mathieson; Christopher G Maher; Andrew J McLachlan; Jane Latimer; Bart W Koes; Mark J Hancock; Ian Harris; Richard O Day; Justin Pik; Stephen Jan; Laurent Billot; Chung-Wei Christine Lin Journal: Trials Date: 2013-07-11 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Wouter Schuller; Raymond W J G Ostelo; Richard Janssen; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2014-04-15 Impact factor: 3.186