Smallest detectable and minimal clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 6 August 2001
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Arthritis & Rheumatism
- Vol. 45 (4) , 384-391
- https://doi.org/10.1002/1529-0131(200108)45:4<384::aid-art352>3.0.co;2-0
Abstract
Objective To discuss the concepts of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the smallest detectable difference (SDD) and to examine their relation to required sample sizes for future studies using concrete data of the condition‐specific Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the generic Medical Outcomes Study 36‐Item Short Form (SF‐36) in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities undergoing a comprehensive inpatient rehabilitation intervention. Methods SDD and MCID were determined in a prospective study of 122 patients before a comprehensive inpatient rehabilitation intervention and at the 3‐month followup. MCID was assessed by the transition method. Required SDD and sample sizes were determined by applying normal approximation and taking into account the calculation of power. Results In the WOMAC sections the SDD and MCID ranged from 0.51 to 1.33 points (scale 0 to 10), and in the SF‐36 sections the SDD and MCID ranged from 2.0 to 7.8 points (scale 0 to 100). Both questionnaires showed 2 moderately responsive sections that led to required sample sizes of 40 to 325 per treatment arm for a clinical study with unpaired data or total for paired followup data. Conclusion In rehabilitation intervention, effects larger than 12% of baseline score (6% of maximal score) can be attained and detected as MCID by the transition method in both the WOMAC and the SF‐36. Effects of this size lead to reasonable sample sizes for future studies lying below n = 300. The same holds true for moderately responsive questionnaire sections with effect sizes higher than 0.25. When designing studies, assumed effects below the MCID may be detectable but are clinically meaningless.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Generic and condition-specific outcome measures for people with osteoarthritis of the kneeRheumatology, 1999
- Global mortality, disability, and the contribution of risk factors: Global Burden of Disease StudyPublished by Elsevier ,1997
- A comparison of different indices of responsivenessJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1997
- The short form‐36 is preferable to the SIP as a generic health status measure in patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplastyArthritis & Rheumatism, 1995
- Clinical, biochemical and imaging methods of assessing osteoarthritis and clinical trials with agents claiming ‘chondromodulating’ activityOsteoarthritis and Cartilage, 1994
- The effect of elective total hip replacement on health-related quality of life.Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 1993
- The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Medical Care, 1992
- Signal measurement strategies: are they feasible and do they offer any advantage in outcome measurement in osteoarthritis?Arthritis & Rheumatism, 1990
- Pain assessment in osteoarthritis: Experience with the WOMAC osteoarthritis indexSeminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism, 1989
- A preliminary evaluation of the dimensionality and clinical importance of pain and disability in osteoarthritis of the hip and kneeClinical Rheumatology, 1986