Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Relative Change in Patient-Reported Outcomes After Surgery for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Nationwide Study of 1,700 Patients.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Victor Gabriel El-Hajj, Anita M Klukowska, Victor E Staartjes, Elias Atallah, Darius Babaei, Mohamad Bydon, Paul Gerdhem, Erik Edström, Adrian Elmi-Terander
{"title":"Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Relative Change in Patient-Reported Outcomes After Surgery for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Nationwide Study of 1,700 Patients.","authors":"Victor Gabriel El-Hajj, Anita M Klukowska, Victor E Staartjes, Elias Atallah, Darius Babaei, Mohamad Bydon, Paul Gerdhem, Erik Edström, Adrian Elmi-Terander","doi":"10.1227/neu.0000000000003596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Healthcare policies have seen significant reforms, with a marked transition toward a patient-centered approach. This shift emphasizes the use of subjective patient-reported outcome measures as key metrics. However, these measures often face limitations, particularly in identifying clinically meaningful changes over time. To address this challenge, the concept of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was introduced. This study aims to evaluate the predictive effectiveness of relative change and its associated threshold, the minimal clinically important relative change (MCIRC), as a potential alternative to absolute differences and the MCID.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data prospectively collected between 2006 and 2021 from the Swedish Spine Registry (Swespine) were analyzed. Patient-reported outcome measures included the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for neck and arm pain, the EQ5D index, EQ VAS, and the Neck Disability Index (NDI). Anchor-based methods were used to calculate the MCID and MCIRC. The predictive performance of absolute differences and relative changes was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1756 patients were included. The selected MCID values were -3 for NRS neck pain intensity, -2 for arm pain intensity, 0.09 for the EQ5D index, 7 for EQ VAS, and -12 for NDI scores. For MCIRC, the chosen values were -47% for NRS neck pain intensity, -40% for arm pain intensity, 386% for the EQ5D index, 52% for EQ VAS, and -32% for NDI scores. On area under the ROC curve, relative change was superior for NRS neck and arm pain scores and NDI, while absolute difference was superior for EQ5D and EQ VAS scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Relative change, along with its associated minimal clinically important value (MCIRC), proved to be a more suitable indicator of subjective satisfaction for NRS and NDI scores. By contrast, absolute differences and the MCID were better suited for evaluating the EQ5D index and EQ VAS scores.</p>","PeriodicalId":19276,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000003596","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Healthcare policies have seen significant reforms, with a marked transition toward a patient-centered approach. This shift emphasizes the use of subjective patient-reported outcome measures as key metrics. However, these measures often face limitations, particularly in identifying clinically meaningful changes over time. To address this challenge, the concept of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was introduced. This study aims to evaluate the predictive effectiveness of relative change and its associated threshold, the minimal clinically important relative change (MCIRC), as a potential alternative to absolute differences and the MCID.

Methods: Data prospectively collected between 2006 and 2021 from the Swedish Spine Registry (Swespine) were analyzed. Patient-reported outcome measures included the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for neck and arm pain, the EQ5D index, EQ VAS, and the Neck Disability Index (NDI). Anchor-based methods were used to calculate the MCID and MCIRC. The predictive performance of absolute differences and relative changes was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

Results: 1756 patients were included. The selected MCID values were -3 for NRS neck pain intensity, -2 for arm pain intensity, 0.09 for the EQ5D index, 7 for EQ VAS, and -12 for NDI scores. For MCIRC, the chosen values were -47% for NRS neck pain intensity, -40% for arm pain intensity, 386% for the EQ5D index, 52% for EQ VAS, and -32% for NDI scores. On area under the ROC curve, relative change was superior for NRS neck and arm pain scores and NDI, while absolute difference was superior for EQ5D and EQ VAS scores.

Conclusion: Relative change, along with its associated minimal clinically important value (MCIRC), proved to be a more suitable indicator of subjective satisfaction for NRS and NDI scores. By contrast, absolute differences and the MCID were better suited for evaluating the EQ5D index and EQ VAS scores.

脊髓型颈椎病术后患者报告预后的最小临床重要差异和相对变化:一项全国1700例患者的研究
背景和目标:医疗保健政策发生了重大改革,向以患者为中心的方法显著过渡。这种转变强调使用主观的患者报告的结果测量作为关键指标。然而,这些措施往往面临局限性,特别是在识别临床有意义的变化时。为了应对这一挑战,引入了最小临床重要差异(MCID)的概念。本研究旨在评估相对变化及其相关阈值,最小临床重要相对变化(MCIRC)作为绝对差异和MCID的潜在替代方法的预测有效性。方法:对2006年至2021年间从瑞典脊柱登记处(Swespine)前瞻性收集的数据进行分析。患者报告的结果测量包括颈部和手臂疼痛的数字评定量表(NRS)、EQ5D指数、EQ VAS和颈部残疾指数(NDI)。采用锚定法计算MCID和MCIRC。用受试者工作特征曲线下面积比较绝对差异和相对变化的预测性能。结果:纳入1756例患者。选择的MCID值NRS颈部疼痛强度为-3,手臂疼痛强度为-2,EQ5D指数为0.09,EQ VAS评分为7,NDI评分为-12。对于MCIRC, NRS颈部疼痛强度选择值为-47%,手臂疼痛强度选择值为-40%,EQ5D指数选择值为386%,EQ VAS选择值为52%,NDI评分选择值为-32%。在ROC曲线下面积上,NRS颈、臂疼痛评分和NDI评分的相对变化优于对照组,EQ5D和EQ VAS评分的绝对差异优于对照组。结论:相对变化及其相关的最小临床重要值(MCIRC)被证明是NRS和NDI评分主观满意度的更合适的指标。相比之下,绝对差值和MCID更适合于评估EQ5D指数和EQ VAS评分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurosurgery
Neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
898
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurosurgery, the official journal of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, publishes research on clinical and experimental neurosurgery covering the very latest developments in science, technology, and medicine. For professionals aware of the rapid pace of developments in the field, this journal is nothing short of indispensable as the most complete window on the contemporary field of neurosurgery. Neurosurgery is the fastest-growing journal in the field, with a worldwide reputation for reliable coverage delivered with a fresh and dynamic outlook.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信