Validation of a consensus-based minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold using an objective functional external anchor

Robert J. Gatchel, Tom G. Mayer, Yunhee Choi, Roger Chou

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background context: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is defined as the smallest change in an outcome that a patient would perceive as meaningful. The Initiative on Methods, Measurement and Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) group proposed defining the MCID as a 30% improvement in self-reported pain or function. However, this MCID threshold has not been validated against an objective physical measure. Purpose: To test the validity of the IMMPACT-based MCID threshold, using an objective physical measure as an external anchor. Study design/setting: Prospective study of chronic disabling occupational lumbar disorder (CDOLD) patients completing a functional restoration program. Patient sample: A consecutive cohort of 743 CDOLD patients. Outcome measures: Self-report measures of pain-related function were compared with an objective lifting measure, the progressive isoinertial lifting evaluation (PILE), obtained after treatment. Methods: The association between reporting 30% or greater improvement (the IMMPACT's MCID key criterion) and the PILE score after treatment was assessed. Results: A 30% or greater improvement on the self-report measures was significantly associated with improvement in physical function on the PILE task. Conclusions: Despite extensive use of the MCID to evaluate effects of treatment in spinal disorders, this is the first empirical documentation of the validity of the IMMPACT's 30% change criterion compared with an objective physical anchor.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)889-893
Number of pages5
JournalSpine Journal
Volume13
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2013

Fingerprint

Consensus
Self Report
Pain
Documentation
Minimal Clinically Important Difference
Therapeutics
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Clinical Trials
Prospective Studies

Keywords

  • Chronic disabling occupational lumbar spinal disorders
  • Functional restoration
  • IMMPACT
  • Minimal clinically important difference (MCID)
  • PILE (progressive isoinertial lifting evaluation)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Surgery

Cite this

Validation of a consensus-based minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold using an objective functional external anchor. / Gatchel, Robert J.; Mayer, Tom G.; Choi, Yunhee; Chou, Roger.

In: Spine Journal, Vol. 13, No. 8, 08.2013, p. 889-893.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{dd1e80a2b30140e28bed8c43eb2ec91e,
title = "Validation of a consensus-based minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold using an objective functional external anchor",
abstract = "Background context: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is defined as the smallest change in an outcome that a patient would perceive as meaningful. The Initiative on Methods, Measurement and Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) group proposed defining the MCID as a 30{\%} improvement in self-reported pain or function. However, this MCID threshold has not been validated against an objective physical measure. Purpose: To test the validity of the IMMPACT-based MCID threshold, using an objective physical measure as an external anchor. Study design/setting: Prospective study of chronic disabling occupational lumbar disorder (CDOLD) patients completing a functional restoration program. Patient sample: A consecutive cohort of 743 CDOLD patients. Outcome measures: Self-report measures of pain-related function were compared with an objective lifting measure, the progressive isoinertial lifting evaluation (PILE), obtained after treatment. Methods: The association between reporting 30{\%} or greater improvement (the IMMPACT's MCID key criterion) and the PILE score after treatment was assessed. Results: A 30{\%} or greater improvement on the self-report measures was significantly associated with improvement in physical function on the PILE task. Conclusions: Despite extensive use of the MCID to evaluate effects of treatment in spinal disorders, this is the first empirical documentation of the validity of the IMMPACT's 30{\%} change criterion compared with an objective physical anchor.",
keywords = "Chronic disabling occupational lumbar spinal disorders, Functional restoration, IMMPACT, Minimal clinically important difference (MCID), PILE (progressive isoinertial lifting evaluation)",
author = "Gatchel, {Robert J.} and Mayer, {Tom G.} and Yunhee Choi and Roger Chou",
year = "2013",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.spinee.2013.02.015",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "889--893",
journal = "Spine Journal",
issn = "1529-9430",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validation of a consensus-based minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold using an objective functional external anchor

AU - Gatchel, Robert J.

AU - Mayer, Tom G.

AU - Choi, Yunhee

AU - Chou, Roger

PY - 2013/8

Y1 - 2013/8

N2 - Background context: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is defined as the smallest change in an outcome that a patient would perceive as meaningful. The Initiative on Methods, Measurement and Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) group proposed defining the MCID as a 30% improvement in self-reported pain or function. However, this MCID threshold has not been validated against an objective physical measure. Purpose: To test the validity of the IMMPACT-based MCID threshold, using an objective physical measure as an external anchor. Study design/setting: Prospective study of chronic disabling occupational lumbar disorder (CDOLD) patients completing a functional restoration program. Patient sample: A consecutive cohort of 743 CDOLD patients. Outcome measures: Self-report measures of pain-related function were compared with an objective lifting measure, the progressive isoinertial lifting evaluation (PILE), obtained after treatment. Methods: The association between reporting 30% or greater improvement (the IMMPACT's MCID key criterion) and the PILE score after treatment was assessed. Results: A 30% or greater improvement on the self-report measures was significantly associated with improvement in physical function on the PILE task. Conclusions: Despite extensive use of the MCID to evaluate effects of treatment in spinal disorders, this is the first empirical documentation of the validity of the IMMPACT's 30% change criterion compared with an objective physical anchor.

AB - Background context: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is defined as the smallest change in an outcome that a patient would perceive as meaningful. The Initiative on Methods, Measurement and Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) group proposed defining the MCID as a 30% improvement in self-reported pain or function. However, this MCID threshold has not been validated against an objective physical measure. Purpose: To test the validity of the IMMPACT-based MCID threshold, using an objective physical measure as an external anchor. Study design/setting: Prospective study of chronic disabling occupational lumbar disorder (CDOLD) patients completing a functional restoration program. Patient sample: A consecutive cohort of 743 CDOLD patients. Outcome measures: Self-report measures of pain-related function were compared with an objective lifting measure, the progressive isoinertial lifting evaluation (PILE), obtained after treatment. Methods: The association between reporting 30% or greater improvement (the IMMPACT's MCID key criterion) and the PILE score after treatment was assessed. Results: A 30% or greater improvement on the self-report measures was significantly associated with improvement in physical function on the PILE task. Conclusions: Despite extensive use of the MCID to evaluate effects of treatment in spinal disorders, this is the first empirical documentation of the validity of the IMMPACT's 30% change criterion compared with an objective physical anchor.

KW - Chronic disabling occupational lumbar spinal disorders

KW - Functional restoration

KW - IMMPACT

KW - Minimal clinically important difference (MCID)

KW - PILE (progressive isoinertial lifting evaluation)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84881174779&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84881174779&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.02.015

DO - 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.02.015

M3 - Article

C2 - 23523434

AN - SCOPUS:84881174779

VL - 13

SP - 889

EP - 893

JO - Spine Journal

JF - Spine Journal

SN - 1529-9430

IS - 8

ER -