» Articles » PMID: 24136679

Usefulness of Minimum Clinically Important Difference for Assessing Patients with Subaxial Degenerative Cervical Spine Disease: Statistical Versus Substantial Clinical Benefit

Overview
Specialty Neurosurgery
Date 2013 Oct 19
PMID 24136679
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The measurement of the therapeutic outcome of cervical spine surgeries commonly relies on four main patient reported outcomes (PROs): Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, and Short Form-36 (SF-36) Physical (PCS) and Mental (MCS) Component Summary. However, the clinical impact of such scores and how they could effectively measure therapeutic efficacy remains unclear. In this context, the concept of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is developing into the standard by which to evaluate treatments, patient satisfaction and cost-effectiveness.

Methods: Eighty-eight consecutive patients undergoing surgery for subaxial degenerative cervical spine disease were selected from a prospective blinded database. PROs (NDI, PCS, MCS and VAS) were collected preoperatively, and together with blinded Surgeon Ratings (SR) at 3 months and 6 months post-surgery. Four anchor-based approaches were used to calculate different MCIDs. Three anchors (VAS, HTI (Health Transition Item of the SF-36) and SR) were used to evaluate surgery outcome. The best clinically and statistically relevant MCID was chosen.

Results: On average, all patients presented with a statistically significant improvement (p < 0.001) postoperatively for NDI (27.42 to 19.42), PCS (33.02 to 42.03), MCS (44 to 50.74) and VAS (2.85 to 1.93). The four MCID anchor-based approaches yielded a range of values for each PRO: 2.23-16.59 for PCS, 0.11-16.27 for MCS and 2.72-12.08 for NDI. When compared to the VAS and HTI anchors, the area under the ROC curve was greater for SR. This finding suggests that SR may be a more reliable anchor for MCID calculation.

Conclusion: The MDC (minimum detectable change) approach together with the SR anchor appears to be the most appropriate MCID method. It offers the greatest area under the ROC curve (threshold above the 95 % CI), and the choice of the anchor did not significantly affect this result. MCID values for this dataset were 5.6 for PCS, 5.12 for MCS and 2.41 for NDI.

Citing Articles

Long-term efficacy and safety of inotersen for hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis: NEURO-TTR open-label extension 3-year update.

Brannagan T, Coelho T, Wang A, Polydefkis M, Dyck P, Berk J J Neurol. 2022; 269(12):6416-6427.

PMID: 35908242 PMC: 9618524. DOI: 10.1007/s00415-022-11276-8.


Validating the VR-12 Physical Function Instrument After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with SF-12, PROMIS, and NDI.

Jenkins N, Parrish J, Nolte M, Hrynewycz N, Brundage T, Singh K HSS J. 2020; 16(Suppl 2):443-451.

PMID: 33380979 PMC: 7749899. DOI: 10.1007/s11420-020-09817-w.


Correlation between NDI, PROMIS and SF-12 in cervical spine surgery.

Vaishnav A, Gang C, Iyer S, McAnany S, Albert T, Qureshi S Spine J. 2019; 20(3):409-416.

PMID: 31678044 PMC: 11620278. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2019.10.017.


Tracking patient-reported outcomes in spinal disorders.

Nayak N, Coats J, Abdullah K, Stein S, Malhotra N Surg Neurol Int. 2015; 6(Suppl 19):S490-9.

PMID: 26605111 PMC: 4617013. DOI: 10.4103/2152-7806.166892.


Assessment of the minimum clinically important difference in neurological function and quality of life after surgery in cervical spondylotic myelopathy patients: a prospective cohort study.

Zhou F, Zhang Y, Sun Y, Zhang F, Pan S, Liu Z Eur Spine J. 2015; 24(12):2918-23.

PMID: 26324283 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-015-4208-3.