Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes : a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation

Show full item record



Permalink

http://hdl.handle.net/10138/311148

Citation

Hao , Q , Devji , T , Zeraatkar , D , Wang , Y , Qasim , A , Siemieniuk , R A C , Vandvik , P O , Lähdeoja , T , Carrasco-Labra , A , Agoritsas , T & Guyatt , G 2019 , ' Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes : a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation ' , BMJ Open , vol. 9 , no. 2 , 028777 . https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028777

Title: Minimal important differences for improvement in shoulder condition patient-reported outcomes : a systematic review to inform a BMJ Rapid Recommendation
Author: Hao, Qiukui; Devji, Tahira; Zeraatkar, Dena; Wang, Yuting; Qasim, Anila; Siemieniuk, Reed A. C.; Vandvik, Per Olav; Lähdeoja, Tuomas; Carrasco-Labra, Alonso; Agoritsas, Thomas; Guyatt, Gordon
Contributor: University of Helsinki, HUS Musculoskeletal and Plastic Surgery
Date: 2019-06
Language: eng
Number of pages: 10
Belongs to series: BMJ Open
ISSN: 2044-6055
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10138/311148
Abstract: Objectives To identify credible anchor-based minimal important differences (MIDs) for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) relevant to a BMJ Rapid Recommendations addressing subacromial decompression surgery for shoulder pain. Design Systematic review. Outcome measures Estimates of anchor-based MIDs, and their credibility, for PROMs judged by the parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendations panel as important for informing their recommendation (pain, function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL)). Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO up to August 2018. Study selection and review methods We included original studies of any intervention for shoulder conditions reporting estimates of anchor-based MIDs for relevant PROMs. Two reviewers independently evaluated potentially eligible studies according to predefined selection criteria. Six reviewers, working in pairs, independently extracted data from eligible studies using a predesigned, standardised, pilot-tested extraction form and independently assessed the credibility of included studies using an MID credibility tool. Results We identified 22 studies involving 5562 patients that reported 74 empirically estimated anchor-based MIDs for 10 candidate instruments to assess shoulder pain, function and HRQoL. We identified MIDs of high credibility for pain and function outcomes and of low credibility for HRQoL. We offered median estimates for the systematic review team who applied these MIDs in Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence summaries and in their interpretations of results in the linked systematic review addressing the effectiveness of surgery for shoulder pain. Conclusions Our review provides anchor-based MID estimates, as well as a rating of their credibility, for PROMs for patients with shoulder conditions. The MID estimates inform the interpretation for a linked systematic review and guideline addressing subacromial decompression surgery for shoulder pain, and could also prove useful for authors addressing other interventions for shoulder problems.
Subject: CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE
IMPINGEMENT SYNDROME
CONSTANT SCORE
HEALTH-STATUS
RESPONSIVENESS
PAIN
DISORDERS
DIAGNOSIS
QUESTIONNAIRE
RELIABILITY
3126 Surgery, anesthesiology, intensive care, radiology
Rights:


Files in this item

Total number of downloads: Loading...

Files Size Format View
e028777.full.pdf 585.1Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record