退行性颈椎神经根病手术后的最小临床重要相对改变而非差异:一项对5300例患者前瞻性收集数据的全国性研究。

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Print Date: 2025-10-01 DOI:10.3171/2025.4.SPINE2598
Victor Gabriel El-Hajj, Anita M Klukowska, Victor E Staartjes, Elias Atallah, Mohamad Bydon, Paul Gerdhem, Erik Edström, Adrian Elmi-Terander
{"title":"退行性颈椎神经根病手术后的最小临床重要相对改变而非差异:一项对5300例患者前瞻性收集数据的全国性研究。","authors":"Victor Gabriel El-Hajj, Anita M Klukowska, Victor E Staartjes, Elias Atallah, Mohamad Bydon, Paul Gerdhem, Erik Edström, Adrian Elmi-Terander","doi":"10.3171/2025.4.SPINE2598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The landscape of healthcare policies has undergone significant reforms, with a notable shift toward a patient-centered basis. This change has prioritized the use of metrics reflecting subjective patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). However, these metrics are often limited, especially in terms of determining clinically relevant changes over time. The concept of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) has been introduced to address this limitation. In this study, the authors aimed to assess the predictive capability of relative change and its corresponding threshold value, the minimal clinically important relative change (MCIRC), as an alternative to the absolute difference and MCID.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospectively collected data from 2006 to 2021 were obtained from the Swedish Spine Registry (Swespine). PROMs included the numeric rating scale (NRS) neck and arm pain scores, the EQ-5D index and EQ visual analog scale (VAS), and the Neck Disability Index (NDI). Anchor-based methods were used to determine MCID and MCIRC. Absolute differences and relative changes were compared in terms of predictive power using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 5323 patients were included. The chosen MCID values were -3 for NRS neck pain, -3 for NRS arm pain, 0.08 for EQ-5D index, 13 for EQ VAS, and -30 for NDI scores. The chosen MCIRC values were -40% for NRS neck pain, -50% for arm pain, 323% for EQ-5D index, 55% for EQ VAS, and -33% for NDI scores. Relative change was superior for NRS neck and arm pain scores and NDI, while absolute difference was superior for EQ-5D and EQ VAS scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Relative change and its corresponding MCIRC were found to be more appropriate as a surrogate of subjective satisfaction when studying the NRS and NDI scores, whereas absolute difference and MCID was more appropriate when addressing EQ-5D index and EQ VAS scores.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":" ","pages":"464-471"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Minimally clinically important relative change instead of difference following surgery for degenerative cervical radiculopathy: a nationwide study on 5300 patients using prospectively collected data.\",\"authors\":\"Victor Gabriel El-Hajj, Anita M Klukowska, Victor E Staartjes, Elias Atallah, Mohamad Bydon, Paul Gerdhem, Erik Edström, Adrian Elmi-Terander\",\"doi\":\"10.3171/2025.4.SPINE2598\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The landscape of healthcare policies has undergone significant reforms, with a notable shift toward a patient-centered basis. This change has prioritized the use of metrics reflecting subjective patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). However, these metrics are often limited, especially in terms of determining clinically relevant changes over time. The concept of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) has been introduced to address this limitation. In this study, the authors aimed to assess the predictive capability of relative change and its corresponding threshold value, the minimal clinically important relative change (MCIRC), as an alternative to the absolute difference and MCID.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospectively collected data from 2006 to 2021 were obtained from the Swedish Spine Registry (Swespine). PROMs included the numeric rating scale (NRS) neck and arm pain scores, the EQ-5D index and EQ visual analog scale (VAS), and the Neck Disability Index (NDI). Anchor-based methods were used to determine MCID and MCIRC. Absolute differences and relative changes were compared in terms of predictive power using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 5323 patients were included. The chosen MCID values were -3 for NRS neck pain, -3 for NRS arm pain, 0.08 for EQ-5D index, 13 for EQ VAS, and -30 for NDI scores. The chosen MCIRC values were -40% for NRS neck pain, -50% for arm pain, 323% for EQ-5D index, 55% for EQ VAS, and -33% for NDI scores. Relative change was superior for NRS neck and arm pain scores and NDI, while absolute difference was superior for EQ-5D and EQ VAS scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Relative change and its corresponding MCIRC were found to be more appropriate as a surrogate of subjective satisfaction when studying the NRS and NDI scores, whereas absolute difference and MCID was more appropriate when addressing EQ-5D index and EQ VAS scores.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16562,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"464-471\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3171/2025.4.SPINE2598\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Print\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2025.4.SPINE2598","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:医疗保健政策的格局已经经历了重大改革,显著转向以患者为中心的基础。这一变化优先使用反映主观患者报告结果测量(PROMs)的指标。然而,这些指标通常是有限的,特别是在确定临床相关变化方面。最小临床重要差异(MCID)的概念已被引入以解决这一限制。在本研究中,作者旨在评估相对变化的预测能力及其相应的阈值,最小临床重要相对变化(MCIRC),作为绝对差和MCID的替代方法。方法:从瑞典脊柱登记处(Swespine)前瞻性收集2006年至2021年的数据。PROMs包括数字评定量表(NRS)颈部和手臂疼痛评分、EQ- 5d指数和EQ视觉模拟量表(VAS)以及颈部残疾指数(NDI)。采用锚定法测定MCID和MCIRC。使用受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)比较绝对差异和相对变化的预测能力。结果:共纳入5323例患者。选择的MCID值NRS颈痛为-3,NRS臂痛为-3,EQ- 5d指数为0.08,EQ VAS为13,NDI评分为-30。NRS颈部疼痛的MCIRC值为-40%,手臂疼痛为-50%,EQ- 5d指数为323%,EQ VAS为55%,NDI评分为-33%。NRS颈、臂痛评分和NDI的相对变化优于EQ- 5d和EQ VAS评分的绝对差异优于NDI。结论:在研究NRS和NDI评分时,相对变化及其对应的MCIRC更适合作为主观满意度的替代指标,而在研究EQ- 5d指数和EQ VAS评分时,绝对差异和MCID更适合作为主观满意度的替代指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Minimally clinically important relative change instead of difference following surgery for degenerative cervical radiculopathy: a nationwide study on 5300 patients using prospectively collected data.

Objective: The landscape of healthcare policies has undergone significant reforms, with a notable shift toward a patient-centered basis. This change has prioritized the use of metrics reflecting subjective patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). However, these metrics are often limited, especially in terms of determining clinically relevant changes over time. The concept of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) has been introduced to address this limitation. In this study, the authors aimed to assess the predictive capability of relative change and its corresponding threshold value, the minimal clinically important relative change (MCIRC), as an alternative to the absolute difference and MCID.

Methods: Prospectively collected data from 2006 to 2021 were obtained from the Swedish Spine Registry (Swespine). PROMs included the numeric rating scale (NRS) neck and arm pain scores, the EQ-5D index and EQ visual analog scale (VAS), and the Neck Disability Index (NDI). Anchor-based methods were used to determine MCID and MCIRC. Absolute differences and relative changes were compared in terms of predictive power using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

Results: A total of 5323 patients were included. The chosen MCID values were -3 for NRS neck pain, -3 for NRS arm pain, 0.08 for EQ-5D index, 13 for EQ VAS, and -30 for NDI scores. The chosen MCIRC values were -40% for NRS neck pain, -50% for arm pain, 323% for EQ-5D index, 55% for EQ VAS, and -33% for NDI scores. Relative change was superior for NRS neck and arm pain scores and NDI, while absolute difference was superior for EQ-5D and EQ VAS scores.

Conclusions: Relative change and its corresponding MCIRC were found to be more appropriate as a surrogate of subjective satisfaction when studying the NRS and NDI scores, whereas absolute difference and MCID was more appropriate when addressing EQ-5D index and EQ VAS scores.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.70%
发文量
396
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Primarily publish original works in neurosurgery but also include studies in clinical neurophysiology, organic neurology, ophthalmology, radiology, pathology, and molecular biology.
×
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