Suppr超能文献

严重下肢创伤中短肌肉骨骼功能评估(SMFA)的最小临床重要差异(MCID):来自7项多中心前瞻性临床试验的汇总数据。

Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) in Severe Lower Extremity Trauma: Pooled Data from 7 Multicenter, Prospective Clinical Trials.

作者信息

Carlini Anthony R, Agel Julie, Bosse Michael J, Frey Katherine P, Staguhn Elena D, Vallier Heather A, Obremskey William, Swiontkowski Marc F, Cannada Lisa K, Tornetta Paul, MacKenzie Ellen J, O'Toole Robert V, Reider Lisa, Allen Lauren E, Collins Susan C, Castillo Renan C

机构信息

Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.

Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, University of Washington Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington.

出版信息

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2024 Oct 2;106(19):1767-1775. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.23.01201. Epub 2024 Jul 2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) is a well validated, widely used patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure for orthopaedic patients. Despite its widespread use and acceptance, this measure does not have an agreed upon minimal clinically important difference (MCID). The purpose of the present study was to create distributional MCIDs with use of a large cohort of research participants with severe lower extremity fractures.

METHODS

Three distributional approaches were used to calculate MCIDs for the Dysfunction and Bother Indices of the SMFA as well as all its domains: (1) half of the standard deviation (one-half SD), (2) twice the standard error of measurement (2SEM), and (3) minimal detectable change (MDC). In addition to evaluating by patient characteristics and the timing of assessment, we reviewed these calculations across several injury groups likely to affect functional outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 4,298 SMFA assessments were collected from 3,185 patients who had undergone surgical treatment of traumatic injuries of the lower extremity at 60 Level-I trauma centers across 7 multicenter, prospective clinical studies. Depending on the statistical approach used, the MCID associated with the overall sample ranged from 7.7 to 10.7 for the SMFA Dysfunction Index and from 11.0 to 16.8 for the SMFA Bother Index. For the Dysfunction Index, the variability across the scores was small (<5%) within the sex and age subgroups but was modest (12% to 18%) across subgroups related to assessment timing.

CONCLUSIONS

A defensible MCID can be found between 7 and 11 points for the Dysfunction Index and between 11 and 17 points for the Bother Index. The precise choice of MCID may depend on the preferred statistical approach and the population under study. While differences exist between MCID values based on the calculation method, values were consistent across the categories of the various subgroups presented.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

摘要

背景

短肌肉骨骼功能评估(SMFA)是一种经过充分验证、广泛应用于骨科患者的患者报告结局(PRO)指标。尽管该指标被广泛使用和认可,但尚未有公认的最小临床重要差异(MCID)。本研究的目的是利用一大群患有严重下肢骨折的研究参与者来创建分布性MCID。

方法

采用三种分布方法来计算SMFA功能障碍指数和困扰指数及其所有领域的MCID:(1)标准差的一半(1/2 SD),(2)测量标准误的两倍(2SEM),以及(3)最小可检测变化(MDC)。除了按患者特征和评估时间进行评估外,我们还在几个可能影响功能结局的损伤组中对这些计算结果进行了审查。

结果

在7项多中心前瞻性临床研究中,从60个一级创伤中心接受下肢创伤手术治疗的3185例患者中总共收集到4298份SMFA评估结果。根据所使用的统计方法,与总体样本相关的SMFA功能障碍指数的MCID范围为7.7至10.7,SMFA困扰指数的MCID范围为11.0至16.8。对于功能障碍指数,性别和年龄亚组内评分的变异性较小(<5%),但与评估时间相关的亚组间变异性适中(12%至18%)。

结论

功能障碍指数的MCID在7至11分之间,困扰指数的MCID在11至17分之间,这是合理的。MCID的精确选择可能取决于首选的统计方法和所研究的人群。虽然基于计算方法的MCID值存在差异,但在各亚组类别中数值是一致的。

证据水平

预后III级。有关证据水平的完整描述,请参阅作者须知。

相似文献

2
What Is the Clinical Benefit of Common Orthopaedic Procedures as Assessed by the PROMIS Versus Other Validated Outcomes Tools?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2022 Sep 1;480(9):1672-1681. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002241. Epub 2022 May 10.
3
What Are the MCIDs for PROMIS, NDI, and ODI Instruments Among Patients With Spinal Conditions?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018 Oct;476(10):2027-2036. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000419.
4
What Are the Minimum Clinically Important Differences in SF-36 Scores in Patients with Orthopaedic Oncologic Conditions?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020 Sep;478(9):2148-2158. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001341.
5
Discordance Abounds in Minimum Clinically Important Differences in THA: A Systematic Review.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2023 Apr 1;481(4):702-714. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002434. Epub 2022 Oct 19.
7
There are Considerable Inconsistencies Among Minimum Clinically Important Differences in TKA: A Systematic Review.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2023 Jan 1;481(1):63-80. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002440. Epub 2022 Oct 5.
10
What Are the Minimal and Substantial Improvements in the HOOS and KOOS and JR Versions After Total Joint Replacement?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018 Dec;476(12):2432-2441. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000456.

本文引用的文献

1
American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score: what does it tell us about patients selecting operative treatment of a rotator cuff injury?
JSES Int. 2023 May 19;7(5):751-755. doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2023.04.007. eCollection 2023 Sep.
2
The Minimal Clinically Important Difference Changes Greatly Based on the Different Calculation Methods.
Am J Sports Med. 2023 Mar;51(4):1067-1073. doi: 10.1177/03635465231152484. Epub 2023 Feb 22.
3
Comparison of Generic, Musculoskeletal-Specific, and Foot and Ankle-Specific Outcome Measures Over Time in Tibial Plafond Fractures.
Foot Ankle Orthop. 2019 Nov 6;4(4):2473011419884008. doi: 10.1177/2473011419884008. eCollection 2019 Oct.
4
Minimal clinically important difference in means in vulnerable populations: challenges and solutions.
BMJ Open. 2021 Nov 9;11(11):e052338. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052338.
6
Prognostic factors for predicting health-related quality of life after intramedullary nailing of tibial fractures: a randomized controlled trial.
Bone Jt Open. 2021 Jan 5;2(1):22-32. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.21.BJO-2020-0150.R1. eCollection 2021 Jan.
7
Minimum Clinically Important Difference in Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment: What Change Matters in Ankle Fractures.
Foot Ankle Spec. 2021 Dec;14(6):496-500. doi: 10.1177/1938640020923262. Epub 2020 May 17.
8
Understanding the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019 Oct;161(4):551-560. doi: 10.1177/0194599819852604. Epub 2019 Jun 4.
10
Long-term patient reported outcomes following acetabular fracture fixation.
Injury. 2018 Jun;49(6):1131-1136. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2018.04.031. Epub 2018 Apr 27.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验