Hägg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sahlgren University Hospital, 413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Eur Spine J. 2003 Feb;12(1):12-20. doi: 10.1007/s00586-002-0464-0. Epub 2002 Oct 24.
When measuring treatment effect in chronic low back pain with multi-item outcome instruments, it is necessary, both for clinical decision-making and research purposes, to understand the clinical importance of the outcome scores. The aims of the present study were three-fold. Firstly, it aimed to estimate the minimal clinically important difference of three multi-item outcome instruments (the Oswestry Disability Index, the General Function Score and the Zung Depression Scale) and of the visual analogue scale (VAS) of back pain. Secondly, it aimed to estimate the error of measurement of these instruments; and its third aim was to describe the clinical meaning of score change. The study population consisted of 289 patients treated surgically or non-surgically in a randomised controlled trial. The minimal clinically important difference was estimated with patient global assessment as the external criterion. It was compared with the standard error of measurement of the instruments. The individual items of the instruments were compared for score changes related to improvement and deterioration. The standard error of measurement of the Oswestry Disability Index, the General Function Score and the Zung Depression Scale was 4, 6 and 3 units, respectively. The 95% tolerance interval was 10, 16 and 8 units, respectively. The minimal clinically important difference was 10, 12 and 8-9 units, respectively, thus not significantly exceeding the tolerance interval. The minimal clinically important difference of VAS back pain was 18-19 units, well exceeding the 95% tolerance interval, which was 15 units. Improvement after treatment for chronic low back pain tends to occur to a greater extent in sleep disturbance, ability to do usual things and psychological irritability, but to a lesser extent in the ability to sit, stand and lift. We conclude that the VAS of back pain is responsive enough to detect the minimal clinically important difference, whereas the smallest acceptable score changes of the Oswestry Disability Index, the General Function Score and the Zung Depression Scale may require an increase to exceed the 95% tolerance interval when used for clinical decision making and for power calculation. Despite improvement after treatment, the ability to sit, stand and lift, remain notable problems.
在使用多项目结局工具测量慢性下腰痛的治疗效果时,出于临床决策和研究目的,有必要了解结局分数的临床重要性。本研究有三个目标。首先,旨在估计三种多项目结局工具(奥斯威斯残疾指数、一般功能评分和zung抑郁量表)以及背痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)的最小临床重要差异。其次,旨在估计这些工具的测量误差;第三个目标是描述分数变化的临床意义。研究人群包括在一项随机对照试验中接受手术或非手术治疗的289名患者。以患者整体评估作为外部标准来估计最小临床重要差异。将其与工具的测量标准误差进行比较。比较了工具的各个项目与改善和恶化相关的分数变化。奥斯威斯残疾指数、一般功能评分和zung抑郁量表的测量标准误差分别为4、6和3个单位。95%的耐受区间分别为10、16和8个单位。最小临床重要差异分别为10、12和8 - 9个单位,因此未显著超过耐受区间。背痛VAS的最小临床重要差异为18 - 19个单位,远超过95%的耐受区间15个单位。慢性下腰痛治疗后的改善在睡眠障碍、进行日常活动的能力和心理易怒方面往往更明显,但在坐、站和提举能力方面改善程度较小。我们得出结论,背痛VAS足够敏感,能够检测到最小临床重要差异,而奥斯威斯残疾指数、一般功能评分和zung抑郁量表在用于临床决策和功效计算时,最小可接受的分数变化可能需要增加到超过95%的耐受区间。尽管治疗后有所改善,但坐、站和提举能力仍然是显著问题。