Skip to main content

A comparison of 3 methodological approaches to defining major clinically important improvement of 4 performance measures in patients with hip osteoarthritis.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Wright, AA; Cook, CE; Baxter, GD; Dockerty, JD; Abbott, JH
Published in: J Orthop Sports Phys Ther
May 2011

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To establish the major clinically important improvement (MCII) of the timed up-and-go test (TUG), 40-meter self-paced walk test (40-m SPWT), 30-second chair stand (30 CST), and a 20-cm step test in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA) undergoing physiotherapy treatment. As a secondary aim, a comparison of methods was employed to evaluate the effect of method on the reported MCII. BACKGROUND: Minimal clinically important difference scores are commonly used by rehabilitation professionals to determine patient response following treatment. A gold standard for calculating MCII has yet to be determined, which has resulted in problems of interpretation due to varied results. METHODS: As part of a randomized controlled trial, 65 patients were randomized into a physiotherapy treatment group for hip OA, in which they completed 4 physical performance measures at baseline and 9 weeks. Upon completion of physiotherapy, patients assessed their response to treatment on a 15-point global rating of change scale (GRCS). MCII was estimated using 3 variations of an anchor-based method, based on the patient's opinion. RESULTS: A comparison of 3 methods resulted in the following change scores being best associated with our definition of MCII: a reduction equal to or greater than 0.8, 1.4, and 1.2 seconds for the TUG; an increase equal to or greater than 0.2, 0.3, and 0.2 m/s for the 40-m SPWT; an increase equal to or greater than 2.0, 2.6, and 2.1 repetitions for the 30 CST; an increase equal to or greater than 5.0, 12.8, and 16.4 steps for the 20-cm step test. CONCLUSION: The variation in methods provided very different results. This illustrates the importance of comparing methodologies and reporting a range of values associated with the MCII, as such values vary, depending upon the methodology chosen.

Duke Scholars

Published In

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther

DOI

ISSN

0190-6011

Publication Date

May 2011

Volume

41

Issue

5

Start / End Page

319 / 327

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Recovery of Function
  • Physical Therapy Modalities
  • Outcome Assessment, Health Care
  • Osteoarthritis, Hip
  • Orthopedics
  • Motor Activity
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Humans
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Wright, A. A., Cook, C. E., Baxter, G. D., Dockerty, J. D., & Abbott, J. H. (2011). A comparison of 3 methodological approaches to defining major clinically important improvement of 4 performance measures in patients with hip osteoarthritis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 41(5), 319–327. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2011.3515
Wright, Alexis A., Chad E. Cook, G David Baxter, John D. Dockerty, and J Haxby Abbott. “A comparison of 3 methodological approaches to defining major clinically important improvement of 4 performance measures in patients with hip osteoarthritis.J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 41, no. 5 (May 2011): 319–27. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2011.3515.
Wright AA, Cook CE, Baxter GD, Dockerty JD, Abbott JH. A comparison of 3 methodological approaches to defining major clinically important improvement of 4 performance measures in patients with hip osteoarthritis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011 May;41(5):319–27.
Wright, Alexis A., et al. “A comparison of 3 methodological approaches to defining major clinically important improvement of 4 performance measures in patients with hip osteoarthritis.J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, vol. 41, no. 5, May 2011, pp. 319–27. Pubmed, doi:10.2519/jospt.2011.3515.
Wright AA, Cook CE, Baxter GD, Dockerty JD, Abbott JH. A comparison of 3 methodological approaches to defining major clinically important improvement of 4 performance measures in patients with hip osteoarthritis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011 May;41(5):319–327.

Published In

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther

DOI

ISSN

0190-6011

Publication Date

May 2011

Volume

41

Issue

5

Start / End Page

319 / 327

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Recovery of Function
  • Physical Therapy Modalities
  • Outcome Assessment, Health Care
  • Osteoarthritis, Hip
  • Orthopedics
  • Motor Activity
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Humans