Minimally important change, measurement error, and responsiveness for the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score

Cöster, Maria; Nilsdotter, Anna; Brudin, Lars; Bremander, Ann

doi:10.1080/17453674.2017.1293445

Cited by 31 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The least prevalent property assessed using the COSMIN checklist was measurement error/agreement. Measurement error, in accordance with the revised COSMIN checklist, assesses whether the minimally important change (MIC) (the smallest measured change in participant experience scores that implies practicable importance) is greater than or equal to the smallest detectable change (SDC) in participants scores, or outside of the limits of agreement (LOA) (a technique used when comparing a new measuring technique to what is already practiced). Thus, in the clinical context, the MIC enables researchers to define a threshold of clinical relevancy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of the validity and reliability of patient‐reported experience measures

Bull

Byrnes

Hettiarachchi

et al. 2019

Health Services Research

182

184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To identify patient‐reported experience measures (PREMs), assess their validity and reliability, and assess any bias in the study design of PREM validity and reliability testing. Data Sources/Study Setting Articles reporting on PREM development and testing sourced from MEDLINE, CINAHL and Scopus databases up to March 13, 2018. Study Design Systematic review. Data Collection/Extraction Methods Critical appraisal of PREM study design was undertaken using the Appraisal tool for Cross‐Sectional Studies (AXIS). Critical appraisal of PREM validity and reliability was undertaken using a revised version of the COSMIN checklist. Principal Findings Eighty‐eight PREMs were identified, spanning across four main health care contexts. PREM validity and reliability was supported by appropriate study designs. Internal consistency (n = 58, 65.2 percent), structural validity (n = 49, 55.1 percent), and content validity (n = 34, 38.2 percent) were the most frequently reported validity and reliability tests. Conclusions Careful consideration should be given when selecting PREMs, particularly as seven of the 10 validity and reliability criteria were not undertaken in ≥50 percent of the PREMs. Testing PREM responsiveness should be prioritized for the application of PREMs where the end user is measuring change over time. Assessing measurement error/agreement of PREMs is important to understand the clinical relevancy of PREM scores used in a health care evaluation capacity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of the validity and reliability of patient‐reported experience measures

Bull

Byrnes

Hettiarachchi

et al. 2019

Health Services Research

182

184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cöster et al. ( 2017 ) defined a 5-point increase in SEFAS as the minimal clinically important difference. Thus, TAR also results in a clinically significant improvement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Good outcome scores and high satisfaction rate after primary total ankle replacement

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and purpose — Total ankle replacement (TAR) is gaining popularity for treatment of end-stage ankle arthritis. Large patient-centered outcome studies are, however, few. Here, we report data from the Swedish Ankle Registry.Patients and methods — We examined outcomes after primary TAR in patients from the Swedish Ankle Registry using PROMs (Patient Reported Outcome Measures; generic: EQ-5D and SF-36, region specific: SEFAS (Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score), and a question on satisfaction). We included 241 patients registered with primary TAR between 2008 and 2016 and who completed PROMs preoperatively and postoperatively up to 24 months. We evaluated changes in PROMs following surgery and estimated effects of age, diagnosis, prosthetic design, and preoperative functional score on the outcomes.Results — All absolute scores improved from preoperative to 24 months after surgery (p ≤ 0.001). 71% of the patients were satisfied or very satisfied at the latest follow-up and 12% dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. Postoperative SEFAS correlated with age (r = 0.2, p = 0.01) and preoperative SEFAS (r = 0.3, p < 0.001), as did patient satisfaction (r = −0.2; p ≤ 0.03). Postoperative SEFAS and EQ-5D were similar between different diagnoses or prosthetic designs. Preoperative SF-36 was associated with diagnosis (p ≤ 0.03), postoperative SF-36 with age (r = 0.2, p = 0.01) and diagnosis (p < 0.03).Interpretation — We found statistically and clinically significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes following TAR surgery. The postoperative region-specific SEFAS was positively associated with older age. Prosthetic design seemed not to influence patient-reported outcome, whereas diagnosis partly did. Studies with longer follow-up are necessary to establish the long-term outcome of TAR and to elucidate whether short- and mid-term outcomes may predict implant failure.

show abstract

“…MIC reflects the smallest measured change in score that patients perceive as being important and defines a threshold when a treatment should be regarded as clinically relevant. The MIC value for the SEFAS in patients with forefoot disorders is 5 score points (Cöster et al 2017). The MIC value for the EQ-5D in patients with foot and ankle disorders it is not defined, but in patients with back pain, another musculoskeletal disorder, the value is 0.173 (Johnsen et al 2013).…”

Section: Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient-reported outcomes of joint-preserving surgery for moderate hallux rigidus: a 1-year follow-up of 296 patients from Swefoot

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and purpose — Hallux rigidus (HR) may cause decreased range of motion, joint pain, and gait disturbances. There is a lack of evidence regarding the outcome of different surgical procedures for moderate HR. We report patient-reported outcomes after joint-preserving surgical procedures for moderate HR. Patients and methods — We included 296 patients registered in Swefoot (Swedish national registry of foot and ankle surgery) who underwent primary surgery for moderate HR 2014 through 2018. We extracted information on anthropometrics, grading of HR, chosen surgical procedure, and patient-reported data including the PROMs SEFAS (summary score 0–48) and EQ-5D-3L (index 0–1) preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. Results — 115 patients underwent metatarsal decompression (i.e., Youngswick) osteotomy (YOT) and 181 underwent cheilectomy. The mean improvement in SEFAS score 1 year after surgery was 12 points (95% CI 10 − 13) for YOT and 10 points (CI 9 − 12) for cheilectomy. Also, EQ-5D improved in both groups. Patients who underwent YOT were more satisfied with the procedure (84% vs. 70% for cheilectomy, p = 0.02). Interpretation — Surgically treated patients with moderate HR improved after both YOT and cheilectomy, according to patient-reported data from Swefoot. Patients who underwent a YOT were more satisfied with their procedure. One possible explanation may be that more patients in the YOT group had a concomitant hallux valgus; however, we have no information on this.

show abstract

Minimally important change, measurement error, and responsiveness for the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score

Cited by 31 publications

References 25 publications

A systematic review of the validity and reliability of patient‐reported experience measures

A systematic review of the validity and reliability of patient‐reported experience measures

Good outcome scores and high satisfaction rate after primary total ankle replacement

Patient-reported outcomes of joint-preserving surgery for moderate hallux rigidus: a 1-year follow-up of 296 patients from Swefoot

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About