Literature DB >> 26110548

Responsiveness and Minimal Clinically Important Change: A Comparison Between 2 Shoulder Outcome Measures.

David Høyrup Christiansen1, Poul Frost, Deborah Falla, Jens Peder Haahr, Lars Henrik Frich, Susanne Wulff Svendsen.   

Abstract

Study Design A prospective cohort study nested in a randomized controlled trial. Objectives To determine and compare responsiveness and minimal clinically important change of the modified Constant score (CS) and the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS). Background The OSS and the CS are commonly used to assess shoulder outcomes. However, few studies have evaluated the measurement properties of the OSS and CS in terms of responsiveness and minimal clinically important change. Methods The study included 126 patients who reported having difficulty returning to usual activities 8 to 12 weeks after arthroscopic decompression surgery for subacromial impingement syndrome. The assessment at baseline and at 3 months included the OSS, the CS, and the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) index. Responsiveness was assessed as follows: by correlation analysis between the change scores of the OSS, CS, and EQ-5D-3L index, and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale; by receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curve analysis using the PGIC scale as an external anchor; and by effect-size statistics. Results At 3 months, a follow-up assessment of 112 patients (89%) was conducted. The change scores of the CS and the OSS were more strongly correlated with the external anchor (PGIC scale) than the change score of the EQ-5D-3L index. The areas under the ROC curves exceeded 0.80 for both shoulder scores, with no significant differences between them, and comparable effect-size estimates were observed for the CS and the OSS. Minimal clinically important change ROC values were 6 points for the OSS and 11 points for the CS, with upper 95% cutoff limits of 12 and 22 points, respectively. Conclusion The CS and the OSS were both suitable for assessing improvement after decompression surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acromioplasty; outcome measure; shoulder; subacromial decompression; subacromial impingement syndrome

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26110548     DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2015.5760

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther        ISSN: 0190-6011            Impact factor:   4.751


  19 in total

Review 1.  Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Substantial Clinical Benefit, and Patient Acceptable Symptom State of Outcome Measures Relating to Shoulder Pathology and Surgery: a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Favian Su; Sachin Allahabadi; Dale N Bongbong; Brian T Feeley; Drew A Lansdown
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2021-01-12

2.  Minimal Clinically Important Differences (MCID) for the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS) and the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS).

Authors:  Marc Randall Kristensen Nyring; Bo Sanderhoff Olsen; Alexander Amundsen; Jeppe Vejlgaard Rasmussen
Journal:  Patient Relat Outcome Meas       Date:  2021-09-22

3.  Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the polish version of the Oxford Shoulder Score in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Authors:  Agnieszka Bejer; Magdalena Szczepanik; Jędrzej Płocki; Daniel Szymczyk; Marek Kulczyk; Teresa Pop
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 3.186

4.  The combined shoulder assessment: a convenient method for obtaining equivalent outcome scores.

Authors:  Emma Torrance; Linda Hallam; Michael J Walton; Puneet Monga; Adam C Watts; Lennard Funk
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2017-11-06

5.  Diabetic and non-diabetic patients report equal symptom relief after arthroscopic capsular release of frozen shoulder.

Authors:  Johanne M Lyhne; Jon R Jacobsen; Søren J Hansen; Carsten M Jensen; Søren R Deutch
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2018-05-19

6.  Use of Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Improvement of Pain and Function in Rotator Cuff Tears: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis With Bias Assessment.

Authors:  Xiao Chen; Ian A Jones; Ryan Togashi; Caron Park; C Thomas Vangsness
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 6.202

7.  Enhanced function and quality of life following 5 months of exercise therapy for patients with irreparable rotator cuff tears - an intervention study.

Authors:  Birgitte Hede Christensen; Kathrine Skov Andersen; Sten Rasmussen; Elizabeth Lykholt Andreasen; Lotte Mejlvig Nielsen; Steen Lund Jensen
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  Intraoperative Brief Electrical Stimulation of the Spinal Accessory Nerve (BEST SPIN) for prevention of shoulder dysfunction after oncologic neck dissection: a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Brittany Barber; Hadi Seikaly; K Ming Chan; Rhys Beaudry; Shannon Rychlik; Jaret Olson; Matthew Curran; Peter Dziegielewski; Vincent Biron; Jeffrey Harris; Margaret McNeely; Daniel O'Connell
Journal:  J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2018-01-23

9.  Treatment of humerus fractures in the elderly: A systematic review covering effectiveness, safety, economic aspects and evolution of practice.

Authors:  Cecilia Mellstrand Navarro; Agneta Brolund; Carl Ekholm; Emelie Heintz; Emin Hoxha Ekström; Per Olof Josefsson; Lina Leander; Peter Nordström; Lena Zidén; Karin Stenström
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-13       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation.

Authors:  Qiukui Hao; Tahira Devji; Dena Zeraatkar; Yuting Wang; Anila Qasim; Reed A C Siemieniuk; Per Olav Vandvik; Tuomas Lähdeoja; Alonso Carrasco-Labra; Thomas Agoritsas; Gordon Guyatt
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-02-20       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.