Determining the minimal clinically important difference of the hand function sort questionnaire in vocational rehabilitation.
Details
Serval ID
serval:BIB_6041C0C6F605
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Determining the minimal clinically important difference of the hand function sort questionnaire in vocational rehabilitation.
Journal
Annals of physical and rehabilitation medicine
ISSN
1877-0665 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1877-0657
Publication state
Published
Issued date
05/2019
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
62
Number
3
Pages
155-160
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
To estimate the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) of the French version of the Hand Function Sort questionnaire (HFS-F). As a comparison, the MCID of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) was also estimated.
We included French-speaking patients hospitalized in a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program for chronic pain of the upper limb after an accident. HFS-F and DASH scores were collected at admission and discharge; the Patient Global Impression of Change measure (PGIC; 7 levels) was collected at discharge. The MCID was estimated by 2 methods: the anchor-based method (receiver operating characteristic [ROC], delta (Δ) mean of scores) and the objective method based on the distribution of scores (standard error of measurement, SEM).
We included 225 patients. By the anchor-based method, the MCID for the HFS-F and DASH was +26 (SD 35) (P<10 <sup>-4</sup> ) and -13 (SD 13) (P<10 <sup>-4</sup> ), respectively, and by the ROC curve, it was +10 to +12 for the Δ-HFS-F and -7.5 to -5 for the Δ-DASH. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.726 [0.638-0.781] for Δ-HFS-F and 0.768 [0.701-0.83] for Δ-DASH. The correlations between the anchor and delta scores were>0.38 (P<10 <sup>-4</sup> ). The SEM was 16.2 for the HFS-F and -4.3 for the DASH.
Values below the SEM must be rejected. Our anchor was significantly correlated with the outcome. Therefore, we propose an MCID for the HFS-F of 26, corresponding to approximately 10% progression of the score.
We included French-speaking patients hospitalized in a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program for chronic pain of the upper limb after an accident. HFS-F and DASH scores were collected at admission and discharge; the Patient Global Impression of Change measure (PGIC; 7 levels) was collected at discharge. The MCID was estimated by 2 methods: the anchor-based method (receiver operating characteristic [ROC], delta (Δ) mean of scores) and the objective method based on the distribution of scores (standard error of measurement, SEM).
We included 225 patients. By the anchor-based method, the MCID for the HFS-F and DASH was +26 (SD 35) (P<10 <sup>-4</sup> ) and -13 (SD 13) (P<10 <sup>-4</sup> ), respectively, and by the ROC curve, it was +10 to +12 for the Δ-HFS-F and -7.5 to -5 for the Δ-DASH. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.726 [0.638-0.781] for Δ-HFS-F and 0.768 [0.701-0.83] for Δ-DASH. The correlations between the anchor and delta scores were>0.38 (P<10 <sup>-4</sup> ). The SEM was 16.2 for the HFS-F and -4.3 for the DASH.
Values below the SEM must be rejected. Our anchor was significantly correlated with the outcome. Therefore, we propose an MCID for the HFS-F of 26, corresponding to approximately 10% progression of the score.
Keywords
Recovery of function, Rehabilitation, Surveys and questionnaires, Treatment outcome, Upper extremity
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
30/12/2018 8:50
Last modification date
20/08/2019 14:17