• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

疼痛残疾生活质量问卷-脊柱的最小临床重要差异评估。

An assessment of the minimal clinically important difference for the pain disability quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Spine.

作者信息

Amatto Alycia, Smith Ashley, Pan Bo, Al Hamarneh Yazid, Burnham Taylor, Burnham Robert

机构信息

Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Vivo Cura Health, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

出版信息

Interv Pain Med. 2022 Jul 8;1(3):100116. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2022.100116. eCollection 2022 Sep.

DOI:10.1016/j.inpm.2022.100116
PMID:39238520
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11372947/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The Pain Disability Quality-Of-Life Questionnaire-Spine (PDQQ-S) is a validated six question patient reported outcome measure designed for usage in minimally invasive spine intervention. The purpose of this study was to determine the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for the PDQQ-S.

DESIGN

Retrospective single arm cohort study involving 411 patients who had undergone lumbar facet and/or sacroiliac joint RFN and had completed pre-and 3-month post RFN PDQQ-S.

METHODS

The MCID using both distribution and anchor-based ("Rebook RFN"; "Analgesic Requirements") methods were calculated.

RESULTS

The distribution-based approach (using standard error of measurement) estimated the MCID to be -17.3 [PDQQ-S baseline mean (SD): 46.9 (7.9)]. This is supported by the anchor based approach, which calculated the MCID to be: -21.5 for rebook RFN; -11.3, -17.2 and -30.5 for mildly, moderately and dramatically decreased NSAID use respectively; and -11.7, -16.9 and -31.7 for mildly, moderately and dramatically decreased opioid use respectively. A moderate reduction in medication use was deemed to be clinically relevant.

CONCLUSION

The MCID value for the PDQQ-S is a score reduction of 17.

摘要

目的

疼痛残疾生活质量问卷-脊柱版(PDQQ-S)是一项经过验证的包含六个问题的患者报告结局指标,专为微创脊柱干预设计。本研究的目的是确定PDQQ-S的最小临床重要差异(MCID)。

设计

回顾性单臂队列研究,纳入411例接受腰椎小关节和/或骶髂关节射频神经毁损术(RFN)并在RFN术前和术后3个月完成PDQQ-S问卷的患者。

方法

采用分布法和基于锚定法(“重新预约RFN”;“镇痛需求”)计算MCID。

结果

基于分布的方法(使用测量标准误差)估计MCID为-17.3[PDQQ-S基线均值(标准差):46.9(7.9)]。基于锚定的方法也支持这一结果,该方法计算出的MCID为:重新预约RFN时为-21.5;非甾体抗炎药(NSAID)使用轻度、中度和显著减少时分别为-11.3、-17.2和-30.5;阿片类药物使用轻度、中度和显著减少时分别为-11.7、-16.9和-31.7。药物使用的适度减少被认为具有临床相关性。

结论

PDQQ-S的MCID值为分数降低17分。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d4cb/11372947/2ea994b538ae/fx1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d4cb/11372947/2ea994b538ae/fx1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d4cb/11372947/2ea994b538ae/fx1.jpg

相似文献

1
An assessment of the minimal clinically important difference for the pain disability quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Spine.疼痛残疾生活质量问卷-脊柱的最小临床重要差异评估。
Interv Pain Med. 2022 Jul 8;1(3):100116. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2022.100116. eCollection 2022 Sep.
2
The effectiveness and predictive factors of Sacroiliac Joint Radiofrequency Neurotomy success - A retrospective cohort study.骶髂关节射频神经切断术成功的有效性及预测因素——一项回顾性队列研究
Interv Pain Med. 2023 Aug 8;2(3):100271. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2023.100271. eCollection 2023 Sep.
3
An assessment of the validity and responsiveness of the Numerical Rating Scale version of the Pain Disability Quality-Of-Life Questionnaire-Spine.疼痛残疾生活质量问卷-脊柱数字评定量表版本的有效性及反应度评估。
Interv Pain Med. 2022 Mar 25;1(2):100087. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2022.100087. eCollection 2022 Jun.
4
An assessment of a short composite questionnaire designed for use in an interventional spine pain management setting.用于介入性脊柱疼痛管理环境中的简短综合问卷评估。
PM R. 2012 Jun;4(6):413-8; quiz 418. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2012.03.018.
5
Discordance Abounds in Minimum Clinically Important Differences in THA: A Systematic Review.THA 中的最小临床重要差异存在显著差异:系统评价。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2023 Apr 1;481(4):702-714. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002434. Epub 2022 Oct 19.
6
Patient-reported outcomes after minimally invasive sacro-iliac joint surgery: a cohort study based on the Swedish Spine Registry.基于瑞典脊柱登记处的微创骶髂关节手术后患者报告的结局:一项队列研究。
Acta Orthop. 2024 Jun 14;95:284-289. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2024.40817.
7
What Is the Clinical Benefit of Common Orthopaedic Procedures as Assessed by the PROMIS Versus Other Validated Outcomes Tools?常见骨科手术的临床获益有哪些?与其他经过验证的结局评估工具相比,PROMIS 评估如何?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2022 Sep 1;480(9):1672-1681. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002241. Epub 2022 May 10.
8
What Are the MCIDs for PROMIS, NDI, and ODI Instruments Among Patients With Spinal Conditions?脊柱疾病患者 PROMIS、NDI 和 ODI 量表的 MCID 是多少?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018 Oct;476(10):2027-2036. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000419.
9
Minimal clinically important difference in patients who underwent decompression alone for lumbar degenerative disease.仅接受减压治疗的腰椎退行性疾病患者的最小临床重要差异。
Spine J. 2022 Apr;22(4):549-560. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.10.010. Epub 2021 Oct 23.
10
Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.经椎间孔腰椎体间融合术治疗退行性腰椎滑脱症后评估疼痛、残疾和健康状况的最小临床重要差异的效用。
J Neurosurg Spine. 2011 May;14(5):598-604. doi: 10.3171/2010.12.SPINE10472. Epub 2011 Feb 18.

引用本文的文献

1
What is the optimal block selection paradigm for predicting a successful treatment outcome following sacral lateral branch radiofrequency neurotomy? A real-world cohort study.预测骶外侧支射频神经切断术后成功治疗结果的最佳阻滞选择模式是什么?一项真实世界队列研究。
Interv Pain Med. 2025 Jun 2;4(2):100599. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100599. eCollection 2025 Jun.
2
A retrospective single arm cohort study evaluating the efficacy of lumbar medial branch radiofrequency ablation using a multi-tined probe and perpendicular approach.一项回顾性单臂队列研究,评估使用多尖探头和垂直入路进行腰椎内侧支射频消融的疗效。
Interv Pain Med. 2025 Mar 29;4(2):100575. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100575. eCollection 2025 Jun.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Determining the Minimal Clinical Important Difference for Medication Quantification Scale III and Morphine Milligram Equivalents in Patients with Failed Back Surgery Syndrome.确定腰椎手术失败综合征患者药物量化量表III及吗啡毫克当量的最小临床重要差异。
J Clin Med. 2020 Nov 21;9(11):3747. doi: 10.3390/jcm9113747.
2
Commentary: Statistical significance and clinical significance - A call to consider patient reported outcome measures, effect size, confidence interval and minimal clinically important difference (MCID).评论:统计学显著性与临床显著性——呼吁考虑患者报告的结局指标、效应大小、置信区间和最小临床重要差异(MCID)。
J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2019 Oct;23(4):690-694. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2019.02.009. Epub 2019 Feb 10.
3
The effectiveness of cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy using a perpendicular approach with a three-tined probe: A single-arm, retrospective cohort study.
使用三齿探头垂直入路进行颈椎内侧支射频神经切断术的有效性:一项单臂回顾性队列研究。
Interv Pain Med. 2025 Mar 19;4(1):100572. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100572. eCollection 2025 Mar.
4
Evaluating prognostic block selection criteria in cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy: A retrospective cohort study.评估颈椎内侧支射频神经切断术中预后性阻滞选择标准:一项回顾性队列研究。
Interv Pain Med. 2025 Mar 19;4(1):100559. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100559. eCollection 2025 Mar.
5
The effectiveness of thoracic medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy using a three-tined electrode: A single-arm, retrospective cohort study.使用三尖电极的胸椎内侧支射频神经切断术的有效性:一项单臂回顾性队列研究。
Interv Pain Med. 2025 Mar 1;4(1):100563. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100563. eCollection 2025 Mar.
6
The effectiveness of sacral lateral branch radiofrequency neurotomy for posterior sacroiliac joint complex pain in patients selected by dual sacral lateral branch blocks; A real-world cohort study.经双侧骶外侧支阻滞筛选的患者中,骶外侧支射频神经切断术治疗骶髂关节后复合体疼痛的有效性:一项真实世界队列研究。
Interv Pain Med. 2024 Oct 30;3(4):100442. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2024.100442. eCollection 2024 Dec.
7
A description and outcome evaluation of sacrococcygeal joint radiofrequency neurotomy for treatment of chronic coccydynia - A dorsal approach.骶尾关节射频神经切断术治疗慢性尾骨痛的描述及疗效评估——后路入路
Interv Pain Med. 2024 Aug 10;3(3):100431. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2024.100431. eCollection 2024 Sep.
Statistics In Brief: Minimum Clinically Important Difference-Availability of Reliable Estimates.
简讯:最小临床重要差异——可靠估计值的可用性。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017 Apr;475(4):933-946. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-5204-6. Epub 2017 Jan 3.
4
Minimum Clinically Important Difference: Current Trends in the Spine Literature.最小临床重要差异:脊柱文献的当前趋势
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Jul 15;42(14):1096-1105. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001990.
5
The impact of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice for pain: a systematic review.患者报告结局指标在疼痛临床实践中的影响:一项系统评价
Qual Life Res. 2017 Feb;26(2):245-257. doi: 10.1007/s11136-016-1449-5. Epub 2016 Nov 4.
6
Approaches for estimating minimal clinically important differences in systemic lupus erythematosus.系统性红斑狼疮中最小临床重要差异的评估方法。
Arthritis Res Ther. 2015 Jun 3;17(1):143. doi: 10.1186/s13075-015-0658-6.
7
Determining the clinical importance of treatment benefits for interventions for painful orthopedic conditions.确定针对疼痛性骨科疾病的干预措施治疗益处的临床重要性。
J Orthop Surg Res. 2015 Feb 3;10:24. doi: 10.1186/s13018-014-0144-x.
8
Beyond statistical significance: clinical interpretation of rehabilitation research literature.超越统计学意义:康复研究文献的临床解读
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Oct;9(5):726-36.
9
An assessment of a short composite questionnaire designed for use in an interventional spine pain management setting.用于介入性脊柱疼痛管理环境中的简短综合问卷评估。
PM R. 2012 Jun;4(6):413-8; quiz 418. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2012.03.018.
10
Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale.采用11点数字疼痛评分量表测量的慢性疼痛强度变化的临床重要性。
Pain. 2001 Nov;94(2):149-158. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9.