Nikolas H Kazmers1, Yuqing Qiu2, Minkyoung Yoo3, Andrew R Stephens4, Andrew R Tyser4, Yue Zhang2. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. Electronic address: nkazmers@gmail.com. 2. Division of Public Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 3. Department of Economics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 4. Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is used in research and clinical settings as a benchmark to gauge improvement following treatment. The purpose of this study was to provide anchor-based MCID estimates for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and legacy instruments in a nonshoulder hand and upper extremity population. METHODS: Adult patients (≥18 years) seeking care at a tertiary academic outpatient hand surgery clinic completed patient-reported outcome measures on tablet computers between January 2015 and August 2017. Data were collected at baseline and at 6 ± 2 weeks of follow-up. The PROMIS Upper Extremity (UE), Physical Function (PF), and Pain Interference (PI) Computer Adaptive Test (CAT) instruments were administered, along with the shortened Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH). A mean change anchor-based method was used to estimate MCIDs by comparing scores between anchor groups reporting no change versus slightly improved in terms of function and pain. RESULTS: Scores for each instrument significantly improved over the study period. With significant differences in scores between groups reporting no change and slightly improved function, anchor-based MCID estimates were calculated as follows: 2.1 for the PROMIS UE CAT, 1.7 for the PROMIS PF CAT, and 6.8 for the QuickDASH. There was no significant difference in PROMIS PI CAT scores between anchor groups when queried for level of pain improvement, precluding estimation of an anchor-based MCID. CONCLUSIONS: We have provided anchor-based MCID estimates for the PROMIS UE CAT, PROMIS PF CAT, and the QuickDASH for a general nonshoulder hand and upper extremity population. These values may be useful in future research for informing power calculations and when interpreting whether the magnitude of change on these instruments is clinically significant at a population level. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides clinicians with a reference for values that may reflect clinically meaningful changes in scores for patient-reported outcome instruments commonly utilized in the current hand surgery literature.
PURPOSE: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is used in research and clinical settings as a benchmark to gauge improvement following treatment. The purpose of this study was to provide anchor-based MCID estimates for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and legacy instruments in a nonshoulder hand and upper extremity population. METHODS: Adult patients (≥18 years) seeking care at a tertiary academic outpatient hand surgery clinic completed patient-reported outcome measures on tablet computers between January 2015 and August 2017. Data were collected at baseline and at 6 ± 2 weeks of follow-up. The PROMIS Upper Extremity (UE), Physical Function (PF), and Pain Interference (PI) Computer Adaptive Test (CAT) instruments were administered, along with the shortened Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH). A mean change anchor-based method was used to estimate MCIDs by comparing scores between anchor groups reporting no change versus slightly improved in terms of function and pain. RESULTS: Scores for each instrument significantly improved over the study period. With significant differences in scores between groups reporting no change and slightly improved function, anchor-based MCID estimates were calculated as follows: 2.1 for the PROMIS UE CAT, 1.7 for the PROMIS PF CAT, and 6.8 for the QuickDASH. There was no significant difference in PROMIS PI CAT scores between anchor groups when queried for level of pain improvement, precluding estimation of an anchor-based MCID. CONCLUSIONS: We have provided anchor-based MCID estimates for the PROMIS UE CAT, PROMIS PF CAT, and the QuickDASH for a general nonshoulder hand and upper extremity population. These values may be useful in future research for informing power calculations and when interpreting whether the magnitude of change on these instruments is clinically significant at a population level. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides clinicians with a reference for values that may reflect clinically meaningful changes in scores for patient-reported outcome instruments commonly utilized in the current hand surgery literature.
Authors: Casey M Beleckas; Alex Padovano; Jason Guattery; Aaron M Chamberlain; Jay D Keener; Ryan P Calfee Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2017-07-12 Impact factor: 2.230
Authors: David Cella; William Riley; Arthur Stone; Nan Rothrock; Bryce Reeve; Susan Yount; Dagmar Amtmann; Rita Bode; Daniel Buysse; Seung Choi; Karon Cook; Robert Devellis; Darren DeWalt; James F Fries; Richard Gershon; Elizabeth A Hahn; Jin-Shei Lai; Paul Pilkonis; Dennis Revicki; Matthias Rose; Kevin Weinfurt; Ron Hays Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2010-08-04 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Brinkley Sandvall; Ugochi C Okoroafor; William Gerull; Jason Guattery; Ryan P Calfee Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2019-04-04 Impact factor: 2.230
Authors: Nikolas H Kazmers; Angela P Presson; Ziji Yu; Wyatt Walsh; Douglas T Hutchinson; Andrew R Tyser Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2020-07-05 Impact factor: 2.230
Authors: Richard M McEntee; William L Wang; Alexander J Rondon; Jacob E Tulipan; Kevin F Lutsky; Lili E Schindelar; Jonas L Matzon; Pedro K Beredjiklian Journal: Hand (N Y) Date: 2020-10-19
Authors: James C Hubbard; Yue Zhang; Yuqing Qiu; Minkyoung Yoo; Andrew R Stephens; Michelle Zeidan; Nikolas H Kazmers Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Jennifer Moriatis Wolf; Aleksandra Turkiewicz; Martin Englund; Jon Karlsson; Marianne Arner; Isam Atroshi Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2021-09-01 Impact factor: 4.755
Authors: Nikolas H Kazmers; Yuqing Qiu; Minkyoung Yoo; Andrew R Stephens; Michelle Zeidan; Yue Zhang Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2021-03-31 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Noelle E Carlozzi; Nicholas R Boileau; Matthew W Roché; Rebecca E Ready; Joel S Perlmutter; Kelvin L Chou; Stacey K Barton; Michael K McCormack; Julie C Stout; David Cella; Jennifer A Miner; Jane S Paulsen Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2020-08-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: John T Wilkinson; Jordan W Clawson; Chelsea M Allen; Angela P Presson; Andrew R Tyser; Nikolas H Kazmers Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2020-11-24 Impact factor: 2.230
Authors: Lauren M Shapiro; Mung Phan Đình; Luan Tran; Paige M Fox; Marc J Richard; Robin N Kamal Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2021-06-17 Impact factor: 2.342