Determination of the minimal clinically important difference in rheumatoid arthritis joint damage of the Sharp/van der Heijde and Larsen/Scott scoring methods by clinical experts and comparison with the smallest detectable difference
Open Access
- 5 April 2002
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Arthritis & Rheumatism
- Vol. 46 (4) , 913-920
- https://doi.org/10.1002/art.10190
Abstract
Objective To assess the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in joint damage on hand and foot radiographs of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as assessed with the Sharp/van der Heijde and Larsen/Scott methods, and to study how the smallest detectable difference (SDD) relates to the MCID for each method. Methods The judgments of an international panel of experts on the clinical relevance of progression of joint damage as seen on sets of radiographs obtained at 1‐year intervals in 4 clinical settings (early versus late RA and mild versus high disease activity) were used as the external criterion, which was compared with the progression scores as determined by the 2 scoring methods. Progression scores with the highest combined sensitivity and specificity for detecting clinically relevant progression represented the MCID. Subsequently, the sensitivity and specificity of the scoring methods were determined when using the SDD as the threshold for relevant progression, and these were compared with the sensitivity and specificity of the MCID. Results The panel judged changes in joint damage around the level of the SDD (5.0) of the Sharp/van der Heijde method as minimal clinically important, resulting in satisfactory sensitivity (mean 79%) and specificity (mean 84%) for detecting clinically important progression in the 4 clinical settings when using the SDD as the threshold value. The MCID (mean 2.3) of the Larsen/Scott method was much smaller than its SDD (5.8), and the sensitivity for detecting clinically important progression by applying the SDD as threshold was consequently low (mean 51%), accompanied by high specificity (mean 99%). Conclusion This study suggests that the SDD of the Sharp/van der Heijde method can be used as the MCID, i.e., as the threshold level for individual response criteria. The SDD of the Larsen/Scott method, however, turned out to be too insensitive to use as the threshold for individual clinically relevant change.Keywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Assessing Smallest Detectable Change Over Time in Continuous Structural Outcome Measures: Application to Radiological Change in Knee OsteoarthritisJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1999
- Reading radiographs in chronological order, in pairs or as single films has important implications for the discriminative power of rheumatoid arthritis clinical trialsRheumatology, 1999
- Statistics Notes: Measurement errorBMJ, 1996
- Plain X-rays in rheumatoid arthritis: overview of scoring methods, their reliability and applicabilityBailliere's Clinical Rheumatology, 1996
- Radiological progression of hip osteoarthritis: definition, risk factors and correlations with clinical status.Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 1996
- PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO LARSEN'S SCORING METHODS FOR HAND AND WRIST RADIOGRAPHSRheumatology, 1995
- High agreement but low Kappa: I. the problems of two paradoxesJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1990
- The american rheumatism association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritisArthritis & Rheumatism, 1988
- STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENTThe Lancet, 1986
- Basic principles of ROC analysisSeminars in Nuclear Medicine, 1978