Marc Randall Kristensen Nyring, Bo Sanderhoff Olsen, Alexander Amundsen, Jeppe Vejlgaard Rasmussen
{"title":"西安大略骨关节炎肩关节指数(WOOS)和牛津肩关节评分(OSS)的最小临床重要差异(MCID)。","authors":"Marc Randall Kristensen Nyring, Bo Sanderhoff Olsen, Alexander Amundsen, Jeppe Vejlgaard Rasmussen","doi":"10.2147/PROM.S316920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is an important instrument in the interpretation of changes in patient-reported outcome measures (PROM). To our knowledge, no MCID of the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS) score has ever been reported and no studies have reported an MCID for the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) based on patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis, treated with an anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). The aim of this study was to determine MCID for WOOS and OSS in a cohort of patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis treated with an aTSA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients treated with an aTSA for glenohumeral osteoarthritis at our institution between March 2017 and February 2019 were included. Each patient completed the WOOS and the OSS preoperatively and one year postoperatively. At one year, the patients were asked to rate their overall improvement on a 7-point scale. We used an anchor-based method as our primary method to calculate the MCID, supported by two different distribution-based methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 45 primary aTSA were included. The MCID of WOOS was 12.3 according to the anchor-based method and 14.2 and 10.3 according to the two distribution-based methods. The MCID of OSS was 4.3 according to the anchor-based method and 5.8 and 4.3 according to the two distribution-based methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The anchor-based method is considered superior to the distribution-based method, and therefore we advocate to use this as MCID. For patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis treated with an aTSA, the MCID values were 12.3 points for WOOS and 4.3 points for OSS. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report a MCID value for WOOS and the first study to report a MCID value for OSS in this subgroup of patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":19747,"journal":{"name":"Patient Related Outcome Measures","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/87/19/prom-12-299.PMC8473013.pdf","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Minimal Clinically Important Differences (MCID) for the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS) and the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS).\",\"authors\":\"Marc Randall Kristensen Nyring, Bo Sanderhoff Olsen, Alexander Amundsen, Jeppe Vejlgaard Rasmussen\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/PROM.S316920\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is an important instrument in the interpretation of changes in patient-reported outcome measures (PROM). To our knowledge, no MCID of the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS) score has ever been reported and no studies have reported an MCID for the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) based on patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis, treated with an anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). The aim of this study was to determine MCID for WOOS and OSS in a cohort of patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis treated with an aTSA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients treated with an aTSA for glenohumeral osteoarthritis at our institution between March 2017 and February 2019 were included. Each patient completed the WOOS and the OSS preoperatively and one year postoperatively. At one year, the patients were asked to rate their overall improvement on a 7-point scale. We used an anchor-based method as our primary method to calculate the MCID, supported by two different distribution-based methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 45 primary aTSA were included. The MCID of WOOS was 12.3 according to the anchor-based method and 14.2 and 10.3 according to the two distribution-based methods. The MCID of OSS was 4.3 according to the anchor-based method and 5.8 and 4.3 according to the two distribution-based methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The anchor-based method is considered superior to the distribution-based method, and therefore we advocate to use this as MCID. For patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis treated with an aTSA, the MCID values were 12.3 points for WOOS and 4.3 points for OSS. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report a MCID value for WOOS and the first study to report a MCID value for OSS in this subgroup of patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19747,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient Related Outcome Measures\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/87/19/prom-12-299.PMC8473013.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient Related Outcome Measures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/PROM.S316920\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient Related Outcome Measures","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/PROM.S316920","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10
摘要
背景:最小临床重要差异(MCID)是解释患者报告的结果测量(PROM)变化的重要工具。据我们所知,目前还没有Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS)评分的MCID报道,也没有研究报道基于肩关节骨性关节炎患者解剖性全肩关节置换术(aTSA)治疗的牛津肩关节评分(OSS)的MCID。本研究的目的是确定一组接受aTSA治疗的肩关节骨性关节炎患者中wos和OSS的MCID。方法:纳入2017年3月至2019年2月在我院接受aTSA治疗盂肱骨关节炎的所有患者。每位患者术前和术后1年完成了wos和OSS。一年后,患者被要求以7分制对他们的整体改善进行评分。我们使用基于锚点的方法作为计算MCID的主要方法,并辅以两种不同的基于分布的方法。结果:共纳入45例原发性aTSA。基于锚点的方法WOOS的MCID分别为12.3,基于分布的方法分别为14.2和10.3。基于锚点法的MCID为4.3,基于分布法的MCID为5.8和4.3。结论:锚定法优于分布法,建议采用锚定法作为MCID。对于接受aTSA治疗的盂肱骨关节炎患者,wos的MCID值为12.3分,OSS为4.3分。据我们所知,这是第一个报告wos的MCID值的研究,也是第一个报告该亚组患者OSS的MCID值的研究。
Minimal Clinically Important Differences (MCID) for the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS) and the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS).
Background: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is an important instrument in the interpretation of changes in patient-reported outcome measures (PROM). To our knowledge, no MCID of the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS) score has ever been reported and no studies have reported an MCID for the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) based on patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis, treated with an anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). The aim of this study was to determine MCID for WOOS and OSS in a cohort of patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis treated with an aTSA.
Methods: All patients treated with an aTSA for glenohumeral osteoarthritis at our institution between March 2017 and February 2019 were included. Each patient completed the WOOS and the OSS preoperatively and one year postoperatively. At one year, the patients were asked to rate their overall improvement on a 7-point scale. We used an anchor-based method as our primary method to calculate the MCID, supported by two different distribution-based methods.
Results: A total of 45 primary aTSA were included. The MCID of WOOS was 12.3 according to the anchor-based method and 14.2 and 10.3 according to the two distribution-based methods. The MCID of OSS was 4.3 according to the anchor-based method and 5.8 and 4.3 according to the two distribution-based methods.
Conclusion: The anchor-based method is considered superior to the distribution-based method, and therefore we advocate to use this as MCID. For patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis treated with an aTSA, the MCID values were 12.3 points for WOOS and 4.3 points for OSS. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report a MCID value for WOOS and the first study to report a MCID value for OSS in this subgroup of patients.