Kitty S Chan1, Elizabeth R Pfoh2, Linda Denehy3, Doug Elliott4, Anne E Holland5, Victor D Dinglas6, Dale M Needham7. 1. Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: kchan10@jhu.edu. 2. Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD. 3. Department of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 4. Faculty of Health, University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 5. Department of Physiotherapy, La Trobe University, Department of Physiotherapy, Alfred Health, Institute for Breathing and Sleep, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 6. Outcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery (OACIS) Group, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. 7. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Outcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery (OACIS) Group, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The 6-min walk distance (6MWD), a widely used test of functional capacity, has limited evidence of construct validity among patients surviving acute respiratory failure (ARF) and ARDS. The objective of this study was to examine construct validity and responsiveness and estimate minimal important difference (MID) for the 6MWD in patients surviving ARF/ARDS. METHODS: For this secondary data analysis of four international studies of adult patients surviving ARF/ARDS (N = 641), convergent and discriminant validity, known group validity, predictive validity, and responsiveness were assessed. MID was examined using anchor- and distribution-based approaches. Analyses were performed within studies and at various time points after hospital discharge to examine generalizability of findings. RESULTS: The 6MWD demonstrated good convergent and discriminant validity, with moderate to strong correlations with physical health measures (|r| = 0.36-0.76) and weaker correlations with mental health measures (|r| = 0.03-0.45). Known-groups validity was demonstrated by differences in 6MWD between groups with differing muscle strength and pulmonary function (all P < .01). Patients reporting improved function walked farther, supporting responsiveness. 6MWD also predicted multiple outcomes, including future mortality, hospitalization, and health-related quality of life. The 6MWD MID, a small but consistent patient-perceivable effect, was 20 to 30 m. Findings were similar for 6MWD % predicted, with an MID of 3% to 5%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients surviving ARF/ARDS, the 6MWD is a valid and responsive measure of functional capacity. The MID will facilitate planning and interpretation of future group comparison studies in this population.
OBJECTIVE: The 6-min walk distance (6MWD), a widely used test of functional capacity, has limited evidence of construct validity among patients surviving acute respiratory failure (ARF) and ARDS. The objective of this study was to examine construct validity and responsiveness and estimate minimal important difference (MID) for the 6MWD in patients surviving ARF/ARDS. METHODS: For this secondary data analysis of four international studies of adult patients surviving ARF/ARDS (N = 641), convergent and discriminant validity, known group validity, predictive validity, and responsiveness were assessed. MID was examined using anchor- and distribution-based approaches. Analyses were performed within studies and at various time points after hospital discharge to examine generalizability of findings. RESULTS: The 6MWD demonstrated good convergent and discriminant validity, with moderate to strong correlations with physical health measures (|r| = 0.36-0.76) and weaker correlations with mental health measures (|r| = 0.03-0.45). Known-groups validity was demonstrated by differences in 6MWD between groups with differing muscle strength and pulmonary function (all P < .01). Patients reporting improved function walked farther, supporting responsiveness. 6MWD also predicted multiple outcomes, including future mortality, hospitalization, and health-related quality of life. The 6MWD MID, a small but consistent patient-perceivable effect, was 20 to 30 m. Findings were similar for 6MWD % predicted, with an MID of 3% to 5%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients surviving ARF/ARDS, the 6MWD is a valid and responsive measure of functional capacity. The MID will facilitate planning and interpretation of future group comparison studies in this population.
Authors: Todd W Rice; Arthur P Wheeler; B Taylor Thompson; Jay Steingrub; R Duncan Hite; Marc Moss; Alan Morris; Ning Dong; Peter Rock Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-02-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Michael A Matthay; Roy G Brower; Shannon Carson; Ivor S Douglas; Mark Eisner; Duncan Hite; Steven Holets; Richard H Kallet; Kathleen D Liu; Neil MacIntyre; Marc Moss; David Schoenfeld; Jay Steingrub; B Taylor Thompson Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2011-09-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Eddy Fan; Nancy D Ciesla; Alex D Truong; Vinodh Bhoopathi; Scott L Zeger; Dale M Needham Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2010-03-06 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Todd W Rice; Arthur P Wheeler; B Taylor Thompson; Bennett P deBoisblanc; Jay Steingrub; Peter Rock Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-10-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Margaret S Herridge; Catherine M Tansey; Andrea Matté; George Tomlinson; Natalia Diaz-Granados; Andrew Cooper; Cameron B Guest; C David Mazer; Sangeeta Mehta; Thomas E Stewart; Paul Kudlow; Deborah Cook; Arthur S Slutsky; Angela M Cheung Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-04-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Elizabeth R Pfoh; Amy W Wozniak; Elizabeth Colantuoni; Victor D Dinglas; Pedro A Mendez-Tellez; Carl Shanholtz; Nancy D Ciesla; Peter J Pronovost; Dale M Needham Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2016-09-16 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: A Parker Ruhl; Minxuan Huang; Elizabeth Colantuoni; Robert K Lord; Victor D Dinglas; Alexandra Chong; Kristin A Sepulveda; Pedro A Mendez-Tellez; Carl B Shanholtz; Donald M Steinwachs; Peter J Pronovost; Dale M Needham Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Minxuan Huang; Kitty S Chan; Jennifer M Zanni; Selina M Parry; Saint-Clair G B Neto; Jose A A Neto; Vinicius Z M da Silva; Michelle E Kho; Dale M Needham Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Dale M Needham; Kristin A Sepulveda; Victor D Dinglas; Caroline M Chessare; Lisa Aronson Friedman; Clifton O Bingham; Alison E Turnbull Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Kitty S Chan; Lisa Aronson Friedman; Victor D Dinglas; Catherine L Hough; Carl Shanholtz; E Wesley Ely; Peter E Morris; Pedro A Mendez-Tellez; James C Jackson; Ramona O Hopkins; Dale M Needham Journal: Thorax Date: 2017-01-20 Impact factor: 9.139
Authors: Kitty S Chan; Lisa Aronson Friedman; Victor D Dinglas; Catherine L Hough; Peter E Morris; Pedro A Mendez-Tellez; James C Jackson; E Wesley Ely; Ramona O Hopkins; Dale M Needham Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Kitty S Chan; Marina Mourtzakis; Lisa Aronson Friedman; Victor D Dinglas; Catherine L Hough; E Wesley Ely; Peter E Morris; Ramona O Hopkins; Dale M Needham Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Alison E Turnbull; Anahita Rabiee; Wesley E Davis; Mohamed Farhan Nasser; Venkat Reddy Venna; Rohini Lolitha; Ramona O Hopkins; O Joseph Bienvenu; Karen A Robinson; Dale M Needham Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 7.598