From Data to Clinical Decisions in Chronic Wound Care: Evaluation of the Interpretability, Minimal Important Difference, and Smallest Detectable Change of the Wound-QoL-14 in a Spanish Population
Celia Horcajada-Reales, Manuel Gerónimo-Pardo, Matthias Augustin, Carmen Selva-Sevilla
{"title":"From Data to Clinical Decisions in Chronic Wound Care: Evaluation of the Interpretability, Minimal Important Difference, and Smallest Detectable Change of the Wound-QoL-14 in a Spanish Population","authors":"Celia Horcajada-Reales, Manuel Gerónimo-Pardo, Matthias Augustin, Carmen Selva-Sevilla","doi":"10.1111/iwj.71065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Wound-QoL-14 questionnaire has proven to be a valid instrument for assessing patients with chronic wounds. However, cutoff scores are not established, and the smallest detectable change and the minimal important difference have not been defined. We aimed to assess the interpretability, smallest detectable change and the minimal important difference of the Wound-QoL-14 questionnaire in a Spanish population with chronic wounds. At baseline, patients responded to a 5-Likert global anchor question about how much their wounds had been a problem, and bands of severity were calculated. At a re-test phase they responded to a 7-Likert anchor question about the severity of the change in wound status, and smallest detectable change and minimal important difference were calculated using a combination of anchor-based and distribution-based methods. At baseline, stratification of 323 patients according to simplified bands of severity (0–0.25/0.26–1.00/1.01–2.00/2.01–3.00/3.01–4) showed a moderate correlation with the global anchor question (polychoric correlation = 0.653), but the level of agreement (41.5%) was poor (Krippendorff's alfa coefficient = 0.609). For 197 re-test patients, the Wound-QoL-14 individual smallest detectable change was lower than the weighted minimal important difference (0.39 vs. 0.53 points, respectively). These findings support the interpretability of the Spanish version of the Wound-QoL-14 questionnaire for clinical and research use.</p>","PeriodicalId":14451,"journal":{"name":"International Wound Journal","volume":"23 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13635487/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Wound Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/iwj.71065","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The Wound-QoL-14 questionnaire has proven to be a valid instrument for assessing patients with chronic wounds. However, cutoff scores are not established, and the smallest detectable change and the minimal important difference have not been defined. We aimed to assess the interpretability, smallest detectable change and the minimal important difference of the Wound-QoL-14 questionnaire in a Spanish population with chronic wounds. At baseline, patients responded to a 5-Likert global anchor question about how much their wounds had been a problem, and bands of severity were calculated. At a re-test phase they responded to a 7-Likert anchor question about the severity of the change in wound status, and smallest detectable change and minimal important difference were calculated using a combination of anchor-based and distribution-based methods. At baseline, stratification of 323 patients according to simplified bands of severity (0–0.25/0.26–1.00/1.01–2.00/2.01–3.00/3.01–4) showed a moderate correlation with the global anchor question (polychoric correlation = 0.653), but the level of agreement (41.5%) was poor (Krippendorff's alfa coefficient = 0.609). For 197 re-test patients, the Wound-QoL-14 individual smallest detectable change was lower than the weighted minimal important difference (0.39 vs. 0.53 points, respectively). These findings support the interpretability of the Spanish version of the Wound-QoL-14 questionnaire for clinical and research use.
期刊介绍:
The Editors welcome papers on all aspects of prevention and treatment of wounds and associated conditions in the fields of surgery, dermatology, oncology, nursing, radiotherapy, physical therapy, occupational therapy and podiatry. The Journal accepts papers in the following categories:
- Research papers
- Review articles
- Clinical studies
- Letters
- News and Views: international perspectives, education initiatives, guidelines and different activities of groups and societies.
Calendar of events
The Editors are supported by a board of international experts and a panel of reviewers across a range of disciplines and specialties which ensures only the most current and relevant research is published.