» Articles » PMID: 27716460

Minimal Important Difference After Hand Surgery: a Prospective Assessment for DASH, MHQ, and SF-12

Overview
Journal SICOT J
Publisher EDP Sciences
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2016 Oct 8
PMID 27716460
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: Minimal important difference (MID) score is an important measure for surgical clinical research and impacts on treatment decisions. Our approach considered patient satisfaction as the relevant anchor criteria. The aims of this study were: determine after surgery MID for three relevant questionnaires: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ), and Short Form 12 (SF-12); and assess the correlation between these scores and patient reported satisfaction.

Methods: Adult patients where surgery was indicated for any hand/wrist conditions. Study was conducted in a teaching hospital, São Paulo, Brazil. Participants responded to DASH, SF-12, MHQ, and a Likert satisfaction scale before and three months after a procedure. Satisfaction was considered as the anchor for determining MID after a procedure. The correlation between satisfaction and the instruments were measured. Two statistical approaches were utilized for determining MIDs and were used for consistency and generalizability purposes. For MID determination, receiver operating curves were utilized and MID cut-offs were followed by sensitivity and specificity measures.

Results: Fifty patients were included with no follow-up losses. MID for DASH was 18.8 and 15.4. MID for MHQ was 14.7 for both approaches. Data from SF-12 was not reliable after statistical analyses and demonstrated poor correlation with patient satisfaction. MID for DASH and MHQ were found and demonstrated larger standards than literature-reported patients when surgery was not the main intervention. DASH and MHQ had moderate correlation with patient reported satisfaction. SF-12 MID was not reliable and had poor correlation to patient satisfaction. These data suggests that ambulatory hand surgery patients may have greater expectations regarding improvement than other patients.

Citing Articles

An Evaluation of Patient-reported Outcome Measures and Minimal Clinically Important Difference Usage in Hand Surgery.

Nielsen C, Merrell D, Reichenbach R, Mayolo P, Qubain L, Hustedt J Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2023; 11(12):e5490.

PMID: 38111720 PMC: 10727676. DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005490.


Relationship between pain, nerve injury and clinical outcomes after flexor tendon injuries in zones 1-2: a retrospective cohort study.

Beckmann-Fries V, Calcagni M, Schrepfer L, Kaempfen A, Vogelin E, Tobler-Ammann B Hand Ther. 2023; 28(2):60-71.

PMID: 37904861 PMC: 10584069. DOI: 10.1177/17589983231159187.


Treatment of Wrist Dorsal Synovial Cyst with Percutaneous Sclerotherapy Using Hypertonic Saline Solution.

Gobetti M, Santos J, Pires F, Nakachima L, Belloti J, Faloppa F Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo). 2023; 58(1):108-113.

PMID: 36969777 PMC: 10038704. DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740294.


Letter regarding "The Efficacy of Intra-Articular Versus Extra-Articular Corticosteroid Injections in the Thumb Carpometacarpal Joint".

Herren D, Neumeister S, Marks M J Hand Surg Glob Online. 2022; 4(6):382.

PMID: 36425384 PMC: 9678712. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsg.2022.06.004.


Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand and Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaires: Exploring Responsiveness and Diagnostic Performance in a Sample of Outpatients with and without Hand and Wrist Complaints.

Moraes V, Faria J, Fernandes M, Raduan-Neto J, Okamura A, Belloti J Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo). 2022; 57(3):449-454.

PMID: 35785113 PMC: 9246537. DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1724071.


References
1.
Orfale A, Araujo P, Ferraz M, Natour J . Translation into Brazilian Portuguese, cultural adaptation and evaluation of the reliability of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2005; 38(2):293-302. DOI: 10.1590/s0100-879x2005000200018. View

2.
Sorensen A, Howard D, Tan W, Ketchersid J, Calfee R . Minimal clinically important differences of 3 patient-rated outcomes instruments. J Hand Surg Am. 2013; 38(4):641-9. PMC: 3640345. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2012.12.032. View

3.
Diaz-Garcia R, Oda T, Shauver M, Chung K . A systematic review of outcomes and complications of treating unstable distal radius fractures in the elderly. J Hand Surg Am. 2011; 36(5):824-35.e2. PMC: 3093102. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2011.02.005. View

4.
Moraes V, Ferrari P, Gracitelli G, Faloppa F, Belloti J . Outcomes in orthopedics and traumatology: translating research into practice. Acta Ortop Bras. 2014; 22(6):330-3. PMC: 4273960. DOI: 10.1590/1413-78522014220601009. View

5.
Cook C . Clinimetrics Corner: The Minimal Clinically Important Change Score (MCID): A Necessary Pretense. J Man Manip Ther. 2009; 16(4):E82-3. PMC: 2716157. DOI: 10.1179/jmt.2008.16.4.82E. View