Literature DB >> 33484830

The critical difference in the DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand) outcome measure after essential upper extremity tumor surgery.

Koichi Ogura1, Mohamed A Yakoub1, Alexander B Christ1, Tomohiro Fujiwara1, Zarko Nikolic1, Patrick J Boland1, Edward A Athanasian1, John H Healey2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand) is a scored questionnaire that is widely used to evaluate the health-related quality of life of patients with upper limb musculoskeletal disorders. However, numerical changes in the measure scores lack clinical significance without meaningful threshold change values of outcome measures that are diagnostically specific. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is useful for the interpretation of scores by defining the smallest change that a patient would perceive. However, the MCIDs of the scores in orthopedic oncology patients has not been reported. We aimed to determine the MCIDs of the measure in orthopedic oncology patients.
METHODS: Data from our health-related quality of life database from 1999 to 2005 were retrospectively reviewed after institutional review board approval. Seventy-eight patients who underwent surgery and completed 2 surveys during postoperative follow-up were evaluated. Two different methods were used to estimate the MCIDs: distribution-based and anchor-based approaches (the latter used receiver operating characteristic analysis).
RESULTS: Using distribution-based methods, the MCIDs of the DASH questionnaire were 7.4 and 8.3 by half standard deviation and the 90% interval of minimal detectable change, respectively. By anchor-based method (receiver operating characteristic analysis), the MCID was 8.3.
CONCLUSION: The MCID values calculated by each method validates that the results for upper extremity oncology patients were similar to those reported in other orthopedic conditions. These results identify the threshold for meaningful improvements in DASH scores in orthopedic oncology patients and establish the reference to evaluate health-related quality of life and the outcomes of upper extremity oncology surgery. These data should be further refined for disease- and reconstruction-specific analyses.
Copyright © 2021 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DASH; MODEMS; minimal clinically important difference; patient-reported outcome measures; quality of life; sarcoma; surveys and questionnaires; upper extremity

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33484830      PMCID: PMC8289920          DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.11.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg        ISSN: 1058-2746            Impact factor:   3.507


  32 in total

Review 1.  Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes.

Authors:  Dennis Revicki; Ron D Hays; David Cella; Jeff Sloan
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Editorial: Importance of Validating the Scores We Use to Assess Patients with Musculoskeletal Tumors.

Authors:  Seth S Leopold
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Japanese version of the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) for patients with malignant musculoskeletal tumors in the upper extremities.

Authors:  Toru Akiyama; Kosuke Uehara; Koichi Ogura; Yusuke Shinoda; Shintaro Iwata; Kazuo Saita; Yoshikazu Tanzawa; Fumihiko Nakatani; Tsukasa Yonemoto; Hirotaka Kawano; Aileen M Davis; Akira Kawai
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 1.601

Review 4.  Minimal important difference to infer changes in health-related quality of life-a systematic review.

Authors:  Ravishankar Jayadevappa; Ratna Cook; Sumedha Chhatre
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 5.  Standardizing patient-reported outcomes assessment in cancer clinical trials: a patient-reported outcomes measurement information system initiative.

Authors:  Sofia F Garcia; David Cella; Steven B Clauser; Kathryn E Flynn; Thomas Lad; Jin-Shei Lai; Bryce B Reeve; Ashley Wilder Smith; Arthur A Stone; Kevin Weinfurt
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-11-10       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Reliability and Validity of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Scoring System for the Upper Extremity in Japanese Patients.

Authors:  Kosuke Uehara; Koichi Ogura; Toru Akiyama; Yusuke Shinoda; Shintaro Iwata; Eisuke Kobayashi; Yoshikazu Tanzawa; Tsukasa Yonemoto; Hirotaka Kawano; Akira Kawai
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Minimal clinically important differences of 3 patient-rated outcomes instruments.

Authors:  Amelia A Sorensen; Daniel Howard; Wen Hui Tan; Jeffrey Ketchersid; Ryan P Calfee
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 2.230

8.  Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care.

Authors:  J E Brazier; R Harper; N M Jones; A O'Cathain; K J Thomas; T Usherwood; L Westlake
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-07-18

9.  Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist.

Authors:  Caroline B Terwee; Lidwine B Mokkink; Dirk L Knol; Raymond W J G Ostelo; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Evaluation of Quality of Life at Progression in Patients with Soft Tissue Sarcoma.

Authors:  Stacie Hudgens; Anna Forsythe; Ilias Kontoudis; David D'Adamo; Ashley Bird; Hans Gelderblom
Journal:  Sarcoma       Date:  2017-04-23
View more
  1 in total

1.  Establishing the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit for the Pain Visual Analog Scale in a Postoperative Hand Surgery Population.

Authors:  Dustin J Randall; Yue Zhang; Haojia Li; James C Hubbard; Nikolas H Kazmers
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2022-05-27       Impact factor: 2.342

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.