Takahiro Ogura1,2, Jakob Ackermann3, Alexandre Barbieri Mestriner2,4, Gergo Merkely2,5, Andreas H Gomoll6. 1. Sports Medicine Center Funabashi Orthopaedic Hospital, Funabashi, Chiba, Japan. 2. Cartilage Repair Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. 5. Department of Traumatology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. 6. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) associated with the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Lysholm, and Short Form-12 (SF-12) after autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI). DESIGN: Ninety-two patients with satisfaction surveys at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively and at least 1 repeated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) were analysed. The MCID was determined using 4 anchor-based methods: average change, mean change, minimally detectable change, and the optimal cutoff point for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. If an anchor-based method was not applicable, standard deviation-based and effect size-based estimates were used. SCB was determined using ROC curve analysis. RESULTS: The 4 anchor-based methods provided a range of MCID values for each PROM (11-18.8 for the KOOS pain, 9.2-17.3 for the KOOS activities of daily living, 12.5-18.6 for the KOOS sport/recreation, 12.8-19.6 for the KOOS quality of life, 10.8-16.4 for the IKDC, and 6.2-8.2 for the SF-12 physical component summary). Using the 2 distribution-based methods, the following MCID value ranges were obtained: KOOS symptom, 3.6 to 8.4; the Lysholm, 4.2 to 10.5; and the SF-12 mental component summary, 1.9 to 4.6. SCB was 30 for the KOOS sport/recreation and 34.4 for the IKDC, which most accurately predict substantial improvement. No significant association was noted between SCB achievement and the baseline PROMs. CONCLUSION: The MCID and SCB determined in our study will allow interpretation of the effects of treatment in clinical practice and trials. Given the varied MCID values in this study, standardisation of the most appropriate calculation methods is warranted.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) associated with the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Lysholm, and Short Form-12 (SF-12) after autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI). DESIGN: Ninety-two patients with satisfaction surveys at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively and at least 1 repeated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) were analysed. The MCID was determined using 4 anchor-based methods: average change, mean change, minimally detectable change, and the optimal cutoff point for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. If an anchor-based method was not applicable, standard deviation-based and effect size-based estimates were used. SCB was determined using ROC curve analysis. RESULTS: The 4 anchor-based methods provided a range of MCID values for each PROM (11-18.8 for the KOOS pain, 9.2-17.3 for the KOOS activities of daily living, 12.5-18.6 for the KOOS sport/recreation, 12.8-19.6 for the KOOS quality of life, 10.8-16.4 for the IKDC, and 6.2-8.2 for the SF-12 physical component summary). Using the 2 distribution-based methods, the following MCID value ranges were obtained: KOOS symptom, 3.6 to 8.4; the Lysholm, 4.2 to 10.5; and the SF-12 mental component summary, 1.9 to 4.6. SCB was 30 for the KOOS sport/recreation and 34.4 for the IKDC, which most accurately predict substantial improvement. No significant association was noted between SCB achievement and the baseline PROMs. CONCLUSION: The MCID and SCB determined in our study will allow interpretation of the effects of treatment in clinical practice and trials. Given the varied MCID values in this study, standardisation of the most appropriate calculation methods is warranted.
Entities:
Keywords:
International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form; Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; Lysholm scale; Short Form–12; autologous chondrocyte implantation; cartilage repair; minimal clinically important difference; substantial clinical benefit
Authors: J D Harris; R A Siston; R H Brophy; C Lattermann; J L Carey; D C Flanigan Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2011-02-17 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: J J Irrgang; A F Anderson; A L Boland; C D Harner; M Kurosaka; P Neyret; J C Richmond; K D Shelborne Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2001 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Johan Vanlauwe; Daniel B F Saris; Jan Victor; Karl Fredrik Almqvist; Johan Bellemans; Frank P Luyten Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2011-09-09 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Luella Engelhart; Lauren Nelson; Sandy Lewis; Margaret Mordin; Carla Demuro-Mercon; Sharif Uddin; Lori McLeod; Brian Cole; Jack Farr Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2012-09-07 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Philipp Niemeyer; Stella Porichis; Matthias Steinwachs; Christoph Erggelet; Peter C Kreuz; Hagen Schmal; Markus Uhl; Nadir Ghanem; Norbert P Südkamp; Gian Salzmann Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2013-10-21 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: P Niemeyer; M Hanus; J Belickas; T László; R Gudas; M Fiodorovas; A Cebatorius; M Pastucha; P Hoza; K Magos; K Izadpanah; L Paša; G Vásárhelyi; K Sisák; M Mohyla; C Farkas; O Kessler; S Kybal; R Spiro; A Köhler; A Kirner; S Trattnig; C Gaissmaier Journal: Cartilage Date: 2022 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Fiona Yeo; Chiu Chin Ng; Kiley W J Loh; Alex Molassiotis; Hui Lin Cheng; Joseph S K Au; Kwun To Leung; Yu Chung Li; Kam-Hung Wong; Lorna Suen; Choi Wan Chan; Janelle Yorke; Carole Farrell; Aishwarya Bandla; Emily Ang; Violeta Lopez; Raghav Sundar; Alexandre Chan Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-04-10 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Charles A Su; Nikunj N Trivedi; Hao-Tinh Le; Lakshmanan Sivasundaram; Travis G Maak; Michael J Salata; James E Voos; Michael Karns Journal: Sports Health Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 3.843
Authors: Johannes Glasbrenner; Wolf Petersen; Michael J Raschke; Matthias Steiger; René Verdonk; Claudio C Castelli; Giorgio Zappalà; Daniel Fritschy; Mirco Herbort Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2020-05-29
Authors: Angelo Boffa; Luca Andriolo; Marco Franceschini; Alessandro Di Martino; Emanuela Asunis; Alberto Grassi; Stefano Zaffagnini; Giuseppe Filardo Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2021-10-05
Authors: John R Matthews; Joseph M Brutico; Daniel T Abraham; Jeremy C Heard; Bradford S Tucker; Fotios P Tjoumakaris; Kevin B Freedman Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2022-02-09