Responsiveness of the Neck Disability Index in patients with mechanical neck disorders

Can a professional development workshop with follow-up alter practitioner behaviour and outcomes for neck pain patients? A randomised controlled trial

“…This is supported by the fact that significant improvements in patient outcomes were occurring prior to the educational intervention in both groups. Patients of both groups demonstrated a reduction in NDI scores (7 points on 50 point scale) after three treatments, which is approaching the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 7.5 for mechanical neck disorders (Young et al, 2009), and exceeds the MCID of 3.5 for non-specific neck pain (Pool et al, 2007). While practice behaviours and confidence improved in both groups following the initial intervention, it is possible that experienced practitioners may M A N U S C R I P T…”

Assessing methods to specify the target difference for a randomised controlled trial: DELTA (Difference ELicitation in TriAls) review

“…175,379,380 One study used the distribution method estimate rather than the anchor method estimate because the distribution value was higher and therefore a more conservative estimate. 381 Other studies also used the largest estimate, which in the case of Kocks and colleagues 112 was an average of two anchor values (as this method yielded higher results than the SEM), whereas Bols and colleagues 382 specified that the point estimate had to be larger than the smallest 'real' change value found using a distribution method. Hsieh and colleagues 118 used the larger of two anchor estimates, which exceeded the measurement error approach estimate.…”

The optimal treatment of type II and III odontoid fractures in the elderly: a systematic review

“…The Neck Disability Index (NDI) was expected to be the most commonly used tool to assess clinical outcome. Therefore, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID/MCIC) for the NDI was predetermined to be 7.5 [6,8,38,39].…”