1Department of Neurosurgery, Carolina Neurosurgery and Spine Associates and Neuroscience Institute, Carolinas HealthCare System, Charlotte, North Carolina.
2Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Neurosurg Focus. 2018 Jan;44(1):E2. doi: 10.3171/2017.10.FOCUS17554.
OBJECTIVE Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) play a pivotal role in defining the value of surgical interventions for spinal disease. The concept of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is considered the new standard for determining the effectiveness of a given treatment and describing patient satisfaction in response to that treatment. The purpose of this study was to determine the MCID associated with surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS The authors queried the Quality Outcomes Database registry from July 2014 through December 2015 for patients who underwent posterior lumbar surgery for grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis. Recorded PROs included scores on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D, and numeric rating scale (NRS) for leg pain (NRS-LP) and back pain (NRS-BP). Anchor-based (using the North American Spine Society satisfaction scale) and distribution-based (half a standard deviation, small Cohen's effect size, standard error of measurement, and minimum detectable change [MDC]) methods were used to calculate the MCID for each PRO. RESULTS A total of 441 patients (80 who underwent laminectomies alone and 361 who underwent fusion procedures) from 11 participating sites were included in the analysis. The changes in functional outcome scores between baseline and the 1-year postoperative evaluation were as follows: 23.5 ± 17.4 points for ODI, 0.24 ± 0.23 for EQ-5D, 4.1 ± 3.5 for NRS-LP, and 3.7 ± 3.2 for NRS-BP. The different calculation methods generated a range of MCID values for each PRO: 3.3-26.5 points for ODI, 0.04-0.3 points for EQ-5D, 0.6-4.5 points for NRS-LP, and 0.5-4.2 points for NRS-BP. The MDC approach appeared to be the most appropriate for calculating MCID because it provided a threshold greater than the measurement error and was closest to the average change difference between the satisfied and not-satisfied patients. On subgroup analysis, the MCID thresholds for laminectomy-alone patients were comparable to those for the patients who underwent arthrodesis as well as for the entire cohort. CONCLUSIONS The MCID for PROs was highly variable depending on the calculation technique. The MDC seems to be a statistically and clinically sound method for defining the appropriate MCID value for patients with grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Based on this method, the MCID values are 14.3 points for ODI, 0.2 points for EQ-5D, 1.7 points for NRS-LP, and 1.6 points for NRS-BP.
患者报告的结局(PROs)在确定脊柱疾病手术干预的价值方面起着关键作用。最小临床重要差异(MCID)的概念被认为是确定特定治疗效果和描述患者对该治疗反应满意度的新标准。本研究的目的是确定与退行性腰椎滑脱症手术治疗相关的 MCID。
作者从 2014 年 7 月至 2015 年 12 月,通过质量结果数据库对接受 I 级退行性脊柱滑脱后路腰椎手术的患者进行了查询。记录的 PRO 包括 Oswestry 残疾指数(ODI)、EQ-5D 和腿部疼痛数字评分量表(NRS-LP)和背部疼痛数字评分量表(NRS-BP)的评分。使用基于锚(使用北美脊柱协会满意度量表)和基于分布(半标准差、小 Cohen 效应量、测量误差标准和最小可检测变化 [MDC])的方法计算每个 PRO 的 MCID。
共有来自 11 个参与地点的 441 名患者(80 名接受单纯椎板切除术,361 名接受融合手术)纳入分析。功能结局评分从基线到术后 1 年的变化如下:ODI 为 23.5±17.4 分,EQ-5D 为 0.24±0.23,NRS-LP 为 4.1±3.5,NRS-BP 为 3.7±3.2。不同的计算方法为每个 PRO 产生了不同的 MCID 值范围:ODI 为 3.3-26.5 分,EQ-5D 为 0.04-0.3 分,NRS-LP 为 0.6-4.5 分,NRS-BP 为 0.5-4.2 分。MDC 方法似乎是计算 MCID 最合适的方法,因为它提供了一个大于测量误差的阈值,并且最接近满意和不满意患者之间的平均变化差异。在亚组分析中,单纯椎板切除术患者的 MCID 阈值与接受融合术的患者以及整个队列的患者相似。
PROs 的 MCID 高度依赖于计算技术。MDC 似乎是一种具有统计学和临床意义的方法,可用于定义 I 级退行性腰椎滑脱症患者的适当 MCID 值。根据该方法,ODI 的 MCID 值为 14.3 分,EQ-5D 为 0.2 分,NRS-LP 为 1.7 分,NRS-BP 为 1.6 分。