MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2147670206 · doi:10.1177/2325967114s00105

The Minimal Clinical Important Difference (MCID) And Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) For The Modified Harris Hip Score And Hip Outcome Score Among Patients Undergoing Surgical Treatment For Femoroacetabular Impingement

2014· article· en· W2147670206 sur OpenAlexaff
Jaskarndip Chahal, Geoffrey S. Van Thiel, Richard C. Mather, Simon Lee, Michael J. Salata, Shane J. Nho

Notice bibliographique

RevueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHip disorders and treatments
Établissements canadiensToronto Western Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineMinimal clinically important differenceFemoroacetabular impingementHip arthroscopyPercentileSurgeryReceiver operating characteristicHarris Hip ScoreProspective cohort studyPhysical therapyCohortPopulationArthroscopyRandomized controlled trialArthroplastyInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the minimal clinical important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Hip Outcome Score (HOS) in a population of patients with femoroacetabular impingement treated with arthroscopic surgery of the hip. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study at a single centre in a consecutive series of patients with femoroacetabular impingement who were treated with arthroscopic labral repair/re-fixation and femoral osteoplasty. The mHHS and HOS were administered at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months post-operatively. Using external anchor questions at the aforementioned post-operative time points, the approach outlined by Juniper et al. was used to determine the MCID, whereas the specific anchor question designed by Tubach was used to determine the PASS. A receiver-operator curve was constructed and used to determine the cuff off point which optimally defined the MCID based on sensitivity and specificity values for each observed change score. The PASS was defined as the 75th percentile of the final mHHS score or HOS subscale scores for patients who considered their state satisfactory. We also stratified the analysis according whether baseline scores influenced the likelihood of achieving the MCID and PASS and odds ratios (OR) were also calculated. Results: There were 130 patients with a mean age of 35.6 (sd 11.7) years and 42.3% were male. The MCID for the mHHS at 3, 6, and 12 months was 13.0, 9.0, and 20.0, respectively. For the HOS (ADL), the MCID was 14.7, 15.0, and 23.0 at 3, 6, and 12 months. For the HOS (Sports), MCID values at 3, 6, and 12 months were 25, 28, and 47. In regards to the PASS, the observed values at 1 year following surgery were as follows: mHHS 84, HOS (ADL) 98, HOS (Sport) 94. The high values observed for the PASS across the different subscales suggests a high proportion of ceiling effects with the mHHS and HOS in this population. The MCID was significantly greater at 1 year for patients with an initial ‘low’ baseline score compared to patients with a ‘high’ baseline score. The PASS was not affected by baseline scores across different instruments. Patients with lower baseline scores were less likely to achieve the MCID one year following surgical intervention [mHHS - OR 0.28; HOS (ADL) - OR 0.23; HOS (Sports) - OR 0.06] yet more likely to achieve the PASS [mHHS - OR 3.36; HOS (ADL) - OR 3.83; HOS (Sports) - OR 3.38). There was a significant negative correlation between increasing age and the ability to obtain a mHHS or HOS above the PASS threshold (p<0.05). Age and sex were not significantly related to the odds of achieving the MCID for the mHHS or HOS. Conclusion: This is the first study in the literature to determine the MCID and PASS for two commonly used hip-joint specific patient-reported outcome measures in patients undergoing arthroscopic hip surgery for FAI. Our findings will allow researchers to determine if interventions related to FAI are meaningful to patients at the individual level across various domains and will also be useful for power calculations in future randomized trials related to hip arthroscopy and the treatment of FAI.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,255
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,797

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,039
Tête enseignante GPT0,307
Écart entre enseignants0,268 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations83
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports MedicineMême sujetHip disorders and treatmentsTravaux en français237 207