Minimum clinically important difference of the health-related quality of life scales in adult spinal deformity calculated by latent class analysis: is it appropriate to use the same values for surgical and nonsurgical patients?

Publication date: Available online 27 August 2018

Source: The Spine Journal

Author(s): Selcen Yuksel, Selim Ayhan, Vugar Nabiyev, Montse Domingo-Sabat, Alba Vila-Casademunt, Ibrahim Obeid, Francisco Sanchez Perez-Grueso, Emre Acaroglu, European Spine Study Group (ESSG)

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) parameters have been shown to be reliable and valid in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) has become increasingly important to clinicians in evaluating patients with a threshold of improvement that is clinically relevant.

PURPOSE

To calculate MCID and minimum detectable change (MDC) values of total scores of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Physical Component Summary (PCS), Mental Component Summary (MCS) of the Short Form 36 (SF-36), and Scoliosis Research Society 22R (SRS-22R) in surgically and nonsurgically treated ASD patients who have completed an anchor question at pretreatment and 1-year follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Prospective cohort.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Surgical and nonsurgical patients from a multicenter ASD database.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Self-reported HRQOL measures (COMI, ODI, SF-36, SRS-22R, and anchor question).

METHODS

A total of 185 surgical and 86 nonsurgical patients from a multicenter ASD database who completed pretreatment and 1-year follow-up HRQOL scales and the anchor question at the first year follow-up were included. The anchor question was used to determine MCID for each HRQOL measure. MCIDs were calculated by an anchor-based method using latent class analysis (LCA) and MDCs by a distribution-based method.

RESULTS

All differences between means of baseline and first year postoperative total score measures for all scales demonstrated statistically significant improvements in the overall population as well as the surgically treated patients but not in the nonsurgical group. The calculated MDC and MCID values of HRQOL parameters in the entire study population were 1.34 and 2.62 for COMI, 10.65 and 14.31 for ODI, 6.09 and 7.33 for SF-36 PCS, 6.14 and 4.37 for SF-36 MCS, and 0.42 and 0.71 for SRS-22R. The calculated MCID values for surgical and non-surgical treatment groups were 2.76 versus 1.20 for COMI, 14.96 versus 2.45 for ODI, 7.83 versus 2.15 for SF-36 PCS, 5.14 versus 2.03 for SF-36 MCS, and 0.94 versus 0.11 for SRS-22R; the MDC values for surgical and nonsurgical treatment groups were 1.22 versus 1.51 for COMI, 10.27 versus 9.45 for ODI, 5.16 versus 6.77 for SF-36 PCS, 6.05 versus 5.67 for SF-36 MCS, and 0.38 versus 0.43 for SRS-22R.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has demonstrated that MCID calculations for the HRQOL scales in ASD using LCA yield values comparable to other studies that had used different methodologies. The most important finding was the significantly different MCIDs for COMI, ODI, SF-36 PCS and SRS-22 in the surgically and nonsurgically treated cohorts. This finding suggests that a universal MCID value, inherent to a specific HRQOL for an entire cohort of ASD may not exist. Use of different MCIDs for surgical and nonsurgical patients may be warranted.

https://ift.tt/2wDkWTR