Minimal Clinically Important Difference Thresholds Research Articles

Social Vulnerability Index Provides Greater Granularity Compared to the Area Deprivation Index When Assessing Outcomes Following Elective Lumbar Fusion.

Retrospective review of a single institution cohort. To determine whether Area Deprivation Index (ADI) or Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) is more suitable for evaluating minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement following elective lumbar fusion as captured by the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). A total of 182 patients who underwent elective one- to two-level posterior lumbar fusion between January 2015 and September 2021. ADI and SVI values were calculated from patient-supplied addresses. Patients were grouped into quartiles based on values; higher quartiles represented greater disadvantage. MCID thresholds for Pain Interference (PI) and Physical Function (PF) were determined via a distribution-based method. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors impacting MCID attainment. Univariate logistic regression was performed to determine which themes comprising SVI values affected MCID achievement. Statistical significance was set at P<0.05. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that ADI and SVI quartile assignment significantly impacted achievement of MCID for PI (P=0.04 and P=0.01 respectively) and PF (P=0.03 and P=0.02 respectively). Specifically, assignment to the third ADI and SVI quartiles were significant for PI (OR: 0.39 and 0.23 respectively), and PF (OR: 0.24 and 0.22 respectively). Race was not a significant predictor of MCID for either PI or PF. Univariate logistic regression demonstrated that among SVI themes, the socioeconomic status theme significantly affected achievement of MCID for PI (P=0.01), while the housing type and transportation theme significantly affected achievement of MCID for PF (P=0.01). ADI and SVI quartile assignment were predictors of MCID achievement. While ADI and SVI may both identify patients at risk for adverse outcomes following lumbar fusion, SVI offers greater granularity in terms of isolating themes of disadvantage impacting MCID achievement.

Establishing minimal clinically important differences and patient acceptable symptom state thresholds following birmingham hip resurfacing.

Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) has emerged as a compelling and innovative alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA), especially among young, active patients. However, the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds have not yet been determined for patients undergoing BHR. Therefore, the current study aimed to (1) determine the MCID and PASS thresholds for both the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS)-Pain and HOOS physical function shortform (PS), for patients who underwent BHR; and (2) identify factors influencing the achievement of MCID and PASS for HOOS-Pain and HOOS-PS. Prospectively collected data from patients undergoing BHR was analyzed. Patients with osteoarthritis and completed preoperative and 1-year postoperative PROMs were included. Distribution-based and anchored-based approaches were used to estimate MCID and PASS, respectively. The optimal cut-off point for PASS thresholds was calculated using the Youden index. MCID for HOOS-Pain and PS were calculated to be 9.2 and 9.3, respectively. The PASS threshold for HOOS-Pain and PS were ≥ 77.7 and ≥ 87.3, respectively. The current study identified several factors affecting postoperative achievement of thresholds. Baseline Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores were a predictor for achieving MCID for postoperative HOOS-Pain, achieving MCID for postoperative HOOS-PS, achieving PASS for postoperative HOOS-Pain, and achieving PASS for postoperative HOOS-PS. Furthermore, baseline HOOS-Pain was a significant predictor for achieving MCID for postoperative HOOS-PS, achieving PASS for postoperative HOOS-Pain, and achieving PASS for postoperative HOOS-PS. MCID and PASS thresholds were established for HOOS-Pain and PS domains following BHR with most patients achieving these clinically meaningful benchmarks. Additionally, several factors affecting achievement of MCID and PASS were identified, including modifiable risk factors that may allow clinicians to implement optimization strategies and further improve outcomes.

High Tibial Osteotomy with Posterior Medial Meniscal Root Reconstruction Yields Improved Radiographic and Functional Outcomes and Healing Rates Compared to Osteotomy Alone

PurposeTo compare pre- and post-operative clinical and radiological outcomes between patients undergoing high tibial osteotomy (HTO) with medial meniscus posterior root tear (MMPRT) reconstruction using gracilis tendon graft versus those without reconstruction MMPRT. MethodsPatients with MMPRT who underwent HTO between January 2018 and December 2021 with minimum 2-year follow-up were included. All the patients were divided into 2 groups based on whether underwent meniscus root reconstruction with tendon graft, HTO alone (33 cases) and HTO with reconstruction MMPRT (21 cases). Clinical evaluation included Lysholm score, international knee documentation committee (IKDC) score, and visual analogue scale (VAS) score. The functional recovery and radiologically outcome of the knee were evaluated preoperatively and at the latest follow-up. Meniscus root healing rates and medial meniscal extrusion (MME) according to the second MRI were compared between the two groups at the latest follow-up. ResultsThe results showed a statistically significant improvement in the postoperative Lysholm score, IKDC score, and VAS score in both groups at the latest follow-up (P<0.001). The analysis of Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for postoperative outcomes revealed that the percentage of patients who reached MCID thresholds was 100% for Lysholm, 100% for IKDC, and 100% for VAS in the HTO with reconstruction MMPRT group. In comparison, the percentages were 87.9% for Lysholm, 90.9% for IKDC, and 100% for VAS in the HTO alone group. Additionally, compared with the HTO alone group, the HTO with medial meniscus posterior root reconstruction using gracilis tendon graft significantly improved the meniscus root healing rates (Complete healing 85.7% vs. 45.4%, 95%CI: 0.003-0.007, P=0.001) and functional recovery (P<0.005 ) at the final follow-up. Additionally, the HTO with reconstruction MMPRT had a significantly better change in K-L grade (improved knees K-L grade: 10/21 vs. 6/33, P=0.033) and MME (2.1±1.0mm vs. 3.1±1.6mm, 95%CI: 0.3-1.7, P=0.007) compared to the HTO alone group. ConclusionsHTO with reconstruction of the meniscal root using a tendon graft resulted in improved radiographic and patient-reported outcomes as well as improved healing rates compared to the HTO alone.

Shoulder Instability-Return to Sports After Injury (SIRSI) Scale Shows That Lack of Psychological Readiness Predicts Outcomes and Recurrence Following Surgical Stabilization

PurposeThis study aimed to evaluate the predictive ability of psychological readiness to return to sports on clinical outcomes and recurrences in athletes who return to sports following shoulder instability surgery. MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent shoulder instability surgery between September 2020 and October 2021 (arthroscopic Bankart repair or Latarjet procedure) with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients were grouped according to the achievement of psychological readiness to return to play using the SIRSI scale (≥ 55 points) measured at 6 months following surgery. Recurrences were measured and functional outcomes were evaluated by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Rowe, and Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the VAS and Rowe scores was calculated using the distribution-based method of ½ standard deviation of the delta (difference between postoperative and preoperative scores). The patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for the VAS scale was set at 2.5 based on previous literature. To evaluate the predictive ability of SIRSI a regression model analysis and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used. ResultsA total of 108 who achieved psychological readiness (PSR) and 41 who did not (NPSR) met the study criteria. PSR achieved significantly higher percentages of MCID and PASS thresholds for VAS than NPSR (MCID: 68.5% vs 48.7%, p=0.026; PASS: 92.5% vs 58.5%, p<0.001). However, there were no differences in the percentage of patients achieving MCID for the Rowe score between groups (98.1% vs 100%, p=0.999). The only strongest independent predictor of postoperative outcomes was being psychologically ready to return to sports. The SIRSI scale had an excellent predictive ability for recurrences (area under curve 0.745, 95% CI 0.5-0.8). Of those who sustained a recurrence, 20% were not psychologically ready compared to 4.3% who were (p= 0.002). A power analysis was not conducted for this study. ConclusionThe SIRSI scale is associated with postoperative clinical outcomes and recurrences in patients who returned to sports following shoulder instability surgery. Patients who were not psychologically ready following shoulder instability surgery had worse clinical outcomes with fewer patients achieving clinically significant outcomes (PASS and MCID) for pain, and a higher risk of recurrence. Level of EvidenceLevel IV, Retrospective cohort study.

Clinical Significance Thresholds in Primary and Revision Latarjet Procedures With Comparable Outcome Achievements

Background: Given the variability across populations and settings, defining the MCID and the PASS for the Rowe and ASOSS scores and patients undergoing primary and revision Latarjet it is essential to have accurate benchmarks relevant to these groups when interpreting clinical results. Purpose: To determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds for the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain during sports, Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS), and Rowe scores after primary and revision Latarjet procedures for treatment of shoulder instability. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Between January 2018 and January 2020, a retrospective review of 149 patients undergoing primary Latarjet (n = 82) and revision Latarjet (n = 67) to treat shoulder instability was performed in a single institution. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. The delta was defined as the change between the pre- and postoperative scores. Distribution-based and anchored-based approaches were used to estimate the MCID and the PASS, respectively. The optimal cutoff point and the percentage of patients achieving those thresholds were also calculated. Results: The distribution-based MCIDs after primary Latarjet were 1.1, 7.5, and 9.6 for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The rates of patients who achieved the MCID thresholds were 93.9%, 98.7%, and 100% for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The PASS thresholds after primary Latarjet were ≤1, ≥90, and ≥85 for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The percentages of patients who achieved PASS thresholds were 82.9%, 89%, and 86.5% for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The distribution-based MCIDs after revision Latarjet were 0.6, 6.2, and 3.4 for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The rates of patients who achieved MCID thresholds were 89.3%, 100%, and 100% for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The PASS thresholds were ≤3, ≥87, and ≥86 after revision Latarjet for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores, respectively. The rates of patients who achieved the PASS thresholds were 88%, 88%, and 91% for the VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS, respectively. Conclusion: This study identified useful values for the MCID and PASS thresholds in VAS, Rowe, and ASOSS scores after primary and revision Latarjet procedures for treating shoulder instability. Most patients achieved MCID and PASS benchmarks, indicating successful primary and revision Latarjet procedure outcomes. These metrics can serve as valuable parameters when analyzing parameters in future studies and have the potential to enhance patient care by optimizing treatment strategies and surgical decision making.

Quadriceps Tendon Autograft ACL Reconstruction With Suture Tape Augmentation: Safe Results Based on Minimum 2-Year Follow-up MRI.

The potential intra-articular effects of ≥1 year after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with independent suture tape augmentation (STA) are not fully understood. To investigate whether incorporating suture tape in an all-soft tissue quadriceps tendon autograft (QTA) ACLR leads to satisfactory patient outcomes while having no intra-articular side effects as determined by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Included were 25 patients with a mean age of 19.9 years (95% CI, 17.3-22.5 years) who underwent QTA ACLR with STA between 2016 and 2019. All patients underwent MRI at ≥1 year postoperatively and had at least a 2-year follow-up (mean, 28 months [95% CI, 26.5-29.5 months]) that included physical examination with anterior laxity testing with KT-1000 arthrometer, radiographs, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). At the final follow-up, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for applicable PROMs were applied to each patient. Postoperative graft and joint integrity were assessed using the Howell classification and the MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score (MOAKS) joint effusion/synovitis grade. The Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and the chi-square or the Fisher exact test for categorical variables were used for statistical analyses. The MRI assessment of the grafts demonstrated intact grafts in all patients. Overall, 96% of patients demonstrated grades 0 or 1 MOAKS for joint effusion/synovitis. All patient outcomes significantly improved from preoperatively to the final follow-up (P < .001), except for the Marx score, which decreased significantly (14.2 [95% CI, 12.7-15.8] vs 9.72 [95% CI, 7.3-12.2]; P = .0014). At least 68% of the patients achieved the MCID threshold, and 92% achieved the PASS threshold for all applicable PROMs. QTA ACLR with STA did not demonstrate adverse intra-articular changes on MRI at ≥1 year postoperatively. In addition, STA did not appear to negatively affect PROMs.

Stratification of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Substantial Clinical Benefit, and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State after Total Shoulder Arthroplasty by Implant Type, Preoperative Diagnosis, and Sex

Clinical significance, as opposed to statistical significance, has increasingly been utilized to evaluate outcomes after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The purpose of this study was to identify thresholds of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for TSA outcome metrics and determine if these thresholds are influenced by prosthesis type (anatomic or reverse TSA), sex, or preoperative diagnosis. A prospectively collected international multicenter database inclusive of 38 surgeons was queried for patients receiving a primary aTSA or rTSA between 2003 and 2021. Prospectively, outcome metrics including ASES, shoulder function score (SFS), SST, UCLA, Constant, VAS Pain, shoulder arthroplasty smart (SAS) score, forward flexion, abduction, external rotation, and internal rotation was recorded preoperatively and at each follow-up. A patient satisfaction question was administered at each follow-up. Anchor-based MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated as defined previously overall and according to implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex. The percentage of patients achieving thresholds was also quantified. A total of 5,851 total shoulder arthroplasties including aTSA (n=2,236) and rTSA (n=3,615) were included in the study cohort. The following were identified as MCID thresholds for the overall (aTSA + rTSA irrespective of diagnosis or sex) cohort: VAS Pain (-1.5), SFS (1.2), SST (2.1), Constant (7.2), ASES (13.9), UCLA (8.2), SPADI (-21.5), and SAS (7.3), Abduction (13°), Forward elevation (16°), External rotation (4°), Internal rotation score (0.2). SCB thresholds for the overall cohort were: VAS Pain (-3.3), SFS (2.9), SST 3.8), Constant (18.9), ASES (33.1), UCLA (12.3), SPADI (-44.7), and SAS (18.2), Abduction (30°), Forward elevation (31°), External rotation (12°), Internal rotation score (0.9). PASS thresholds for the overall cohort were: VAS Pain (0.8), SFS (7.3), SST (9.2), Constant (64.2), ASES (79.5), UCLA (29.5), SPADI (24.7), and SAS (72.5), Abduction (104°), Forward elevation (130°), External rotation (30°), Internal rotation score (3.2). MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds varied depending on preoperative diagnosis and sex. MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds vary depending on implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex. A comprehensive understanding of these differences as well as identification of clinically-relevant thresholds for legacy and novel metrics is essential to assist surgeons in evaluating their patient's outcomes, interpreting the literature, and counseling their patients preoperatively regarding expectations for improvement. Given that PASS thresholds are fragile and vary greatly depending on cohort variability, caution should be exercised in conflating them across different studies.

Diagnosis-Specific Thresholds of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State for KOOS After Total Knee Arthroplasty.

This article was updated on May 1, 2024 because of a previous error, which was discovered after the preliminary version of the article was posted online. The byline that had read "Ahmed K. Emara, MD 1 *, Ignacio Pasqualini, MD 1 *, Alison K. Klika, MS 1 , Melissa N. Orr, BS 1 , Pedro J. Rullán, MD 1 , Nicolas S. Piuzzi, MD 1 , and the Cleveland Clinic Arthroplasty Group†" now reads "Ahmed K. Emara, MD 1 *, Ignacio Pasqualini, MD 1 *, Yuxuan Jin, MS 1 , Alison K. Klika, MS 1 , Melissa N. Orr, BS 1 , Pedro J. Rullán, MD 1 , Nicolas S. Piuzzi, MD 1 , and the Cleveland Clinic Arthroplasty Group†". Literature-reported minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for patient-reported outcome measures demonstrate marked variability. The purpose of this study was to determine the minimal detectable change (MDC), MCID, and PASS thresholds for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Pain subdomain, Physical Function Short Form (PS), and Joint Replacement (JR) among patients with osteoarthritis (OA) who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A prospective cohort of 6,778 patients who underwent primary TKA was analyzed. Overall, 1-year follow-up was completed by 5,316 patients for the KOOS Pain, 5,018 patients for the KOOS PS, and 4,033 patients for the KOOS JR. A total of 5,186 patients had an OA diagnosis; this group had an average age of 67.0 years and was 59.9% female and 80.4% White. Diagnosis-specific MDCs and MCIDs were estimated with use of a distribution-based approach. PASS values were estimated with use of an anchor-based approach, which corresponded to a response to a satisfaction question at 1 year postoperatively. The MCID thresholds for the OA group were 7.9 for the KOOS Pain, 8.0 for the KOOS PS, and 6.7 for the KOOS JR. A high percentage of patients achieved the MCID threshold for each outcome measure (KOOS Pain, 95%; KOOS PS, 88%; and KOOS JR, 94%). The MDC 80% to 95% confidence intervals ranged from 9.1 to 14.0 for the KOOS Pain, 9.2 to 14.1 for the KOOS PS, and 7.7 to 11.8 for the KOOS JR. The PASS thresholds for the OA group were 77.7 for the KOOS Pain (achieved by 73% of patients), 70.3 for the KOOS PS (achieved by 68% of patients), and 70.7 for the KOOS JR (achieved by 70% of patients). The present study provided useful MCID, MDC, and PASS thresholds for the KOOS Pain, PS, and JR for patients with OA. The diagnosis-specific metrics established herein can serve as benchmarks for clinically meaningful postoperative improvement. Future research and quality assessments should utilize these OA-specific thresholds when evaluating outcomes following TKA. Doing so will enable more accurate determinations of operative success and improvements in patient-centered care. Prognostic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Bridging the gap between statistical significance and clinical relevance: A systematic review of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds of scales reported in movement disorders research

BackgroundMinimum clinically important difference (MCID) is the smallest change in an outcome measure that is considered clinically meaningful. Using validated MCID thresholds for outcomes powers trials adequately to detect meaningful treatment effects, aids in their interpretation and guides development of new outcome measures. ObjectivesTo provide a comprehensive summary of MCID thresholds of various symptom severity scales reported in movement disorder. MethodsWe conducted systematic review of the literature and included studies of one or more movement disorders, and reporting MCID scales. Results2763 reports were screened. Final review included 32 studies. Risk of bias (RoB) assessment showed most studies were of good quality. Most commonly evaluated scale was Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) (11 out of 32). Four studies assessing MDS-UPDRS had assessed its different sub-parts, reporting a change of 2.64,3.05,3.25 and 0.9 points to detect clinically meaningful improvement and 2.45,2.51,4.63 and 0.8 points to detect clinically meaningful worsening, for the Part I, II, III and IV, respectively. For Parts II + III, I + II + III and I + II + III + IV, MCID thresholds reported for clinically meaningful improvement were 5.73, 4.9, 6.7 and 7.1 points respectively; while those for clinically meaningful worsening were 4.7, 4.2, 5.2 and 6.3 points, respectively. MCID thresholds reported for other scales included Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS), Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSRS), and Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Scale (BFMD). ConclusionThis review summarizes all the MCID thresholds currently reported in Movement disorders research and provides a comprehensive resource for future trials, highlighting the need for standardized and validated MCID scales in movement disorder research.

The Promising 2-Year Performance of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System in Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Background: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds have been previously defined for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) at 1-year follow-up in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome; however, the MCID and PASS thresholds are yet to be defined for the PROMIS at 2-year follow-up. Purpose: (1) To establish MCID and PASS thresholds for the PROMIS Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) and PROMIS Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) at 2-year follow-up and (2) to correlate PROMIS scores with hip-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome between August and November 2020 with preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative data were identified. Collected scores included those for the PROMIS-PI, PROMIS-PF, Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score–Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), International Hip Outcome Tool–12 (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. MCID thresholds were calculated using the distribution-based method and PASS thresholds using the anchor-based method. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to compare scores between PROMs. Results: A total of 65 patients met the criteria for inclusion (72.3% female; mean age, 36.9 ± 13.5 years; mean body mass index, 26.2 ± 6.0). The mean follow-up was 25.3 ± 3.3 months. Significant preoperative to postoperative improvements were observed for all PROMs (P < .001). MCID thresholds and achievement rates were as follows: HOS-ADL, 10.1 and 75%, respectively; HOS-SS, 13.8 and 79%, respectively; iHOT-12, 14.0 and 67%, respectively; VAS pain, –13.8 and 78%, respectively; PROMIS-PI, –4.7 and 65%, respectively; and PROMIS-PF, 5.8 and 60%, respectively. PASS thresholds and achievement rates were as follows: HOS-ADL, 78.7 and 67%, respectively; HOS-SS, 76.4 and 62%, respectively; iHOT-12, 67.4 and 60%, respectively; VAS pain, 25.5 and 61%, respectively; PROMIS-PI, 57.0 and 65%, respectively; and PROMIS-PF, 45.6 and 58%, respectively. PROMIS-PI scores correlated most strongly with HOS-ADL (r = −0.836), HOS-SS (r = −0.767), and iHOT-12 (r = −0.719) scores and exhibited at least moderate correlations (r≥−0.595) with the other PROM scores. PROMIS-PF demonstrated moderate correlations with all the other PROM scores (r≥−0.586). Strong correlations were seen between the hip-specific PROM scores (r≥−0.745). Conclusion: This study defined 2-year MCID and PASS thresholds for the PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-PF and demonstrated moderate to strong correlations between PROMIS scores and hip-specific PROM scores.

What Are the Diagnosis-Specific Thresholds of Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State in Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BackgroundThis study aimed to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds for Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) pain, physical short form (PS), and joint replacement (JR) 1 year after primary total hip arthroplasty stratified by preoperative diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA) versus non-OA. MethodsA prospective institutional cohort of 5,887 patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (January 2016 to December 2018) was included. There were 4,184 patients (77.0%) who completed a one-year follow-up. Demographics, comorbidities, and baseline and one-year HOOS pain, PS, and JR scores were recorded. Patients were stratified by preoperative diagnosis: OA or non-OA. Minimal detectable change (MDC) and MCIDs were estimated using a distribution-based approach. The PASS values were estimated using an anchor-based approach, which corresponded to a response to a satisfaction question at one year post surgery. ResultsThe MCID thresholds were slightly higher in the non-OA cohort versus OA patients. (HOOS-Pain: OA: 8.35 versus non-OA: 8.85 points; HOOS-PS: OA: 9.47 versus non-OA: 9.90 points; and HOOS-JR: OA: 7.76 versus non-OA: 8.46 points). Similarly, all MDC thresholds were consistently higher in the non-OA cohort compared to OA patients. The OA cohort exhibited similar or higher PASS thresholds compared to the non-OA cohort for HOOS-Pain (OA: ≥80.6 versus non-OA: ≥77.5 points), HOOS-PS (OA: ≥83.6 versus non-OA: ≥83.6 points), and HOOS-JR (OA: ≥76.8 versus non-OA: ≥73.5 points). A similar percentage of patients achieved MCID and PASS thresholds regardless of preoperative diagnosis. ConclusionsWhile MCID and MDC thresholds for all HOOS subdomains were slightly higher among non-OA than OA patients, PASS thresholds for HOOS pain and JR were slightly higher in the OA group. The absolute magnitude of the difference in these thresholds may not be sufficient to cause major clinical differences. However, these subtle differences may have a significant impact when used as indicators of operative success in a population setting.

Variability of MCID, SCB, and PASS Thresholds in Studies Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes After Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review.

An increasing reliance on patient-reported outcomes has led to greater emphasis on minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds in assessing rotator cuff repairs. To review the MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds reported for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after rotator cuff repair. Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. The PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases were queried for full-text journal articles in English published between January 1, 2000, and May 31, 2022. Studies with MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds reported for patients with rotator cuff repair and a minimum of 12 months of follow-up were included. Reported MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds and associated calculation methods were extracted. There were 41 unique studies (6331 shoulders) that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 37 (90%) reported MCID; 16 (39%), PASS; and 11 (27%), SCB values. The most common PROMs were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and the Constant-Murley score. In total, 71% (29/41) of these studies referenced values in the literature, usually studies of patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (21/29). Twelve studies calculated MCID, SCB, or PASS thresholds using anchor-based approaches, whereas 6 studies also calculated thresholds using distribution-based methods. The use of MCID, SCB, and PASS in the rotator cuff repair literature is increasing, with half of the included studies published within the final 17 months of the studied period. Significant variability was seen in the reporting of MCID, SCB, and PASS threshold values after rotator cuff repair. Researchers should prioritize studies that report clinical outcome thresholds calculated using anchor-based methods and should critically review both the anchor question and its response choices. Standardization of MCID, SCB, and PASS values and calculation methods will allow for a more reliable assessment of PROMs in rotator cuff repair moving forward.

Outcomes of Isolated Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair Compared With Concomitant Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair and Arthroscopic Hip Labral Repair: A Propensity-Matched Analysis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

Both gluteal and labral tears are common sources of hip pain, but no studies have evaluated how concomitant arthroscopic labral repair and correction of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) affect outcomes after endoscopic gluteus/minimus repair. (1) To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinically significant outcomes achievements between patients who underwent endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus and arthroscopic hip labral repair with correction of FAIS versus endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus repair without labral repair and (2) to define threshold scores required to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool, and visual analog scale for pain in these patients. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Patients who underwent primary endoscopic gluteus medius/minimus repair between 2012 and 2020 were identified. Those who underwent concomitant arthroscopic labral repair and correction of FAIS with femoroplasty or acetabuloplasty as indicated were propensity matched in a 1 to 1 ratio by sex, age, and body mass index to patients who underwent gluteus medius/minimus repair without labral repair. Patients who completed the study PROs were assessed preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. Threshold scores required to achieve the MCID and PASS thresholds were calculated. A total of 32 patients who underwent simultaneous gluteal and labral repair (G+L) were matched to 32 patients who underwent gluteal repair without labral repair (G); 75% of patients in the G cohort underwent labral debridement, while 25% in this cohort received no labral treatment. A significant difference was observed between groups in preoperative mHHS scores (G+L, 54.4 ± 12.9 vs G, 46.3 ± 14; P = .048) but no differences in any other PRO scores (P≥ .207). The MCID/PASS thresholds were as follows: Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (11.14/83.82), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific (16.07/59.72), mHHS (11.47/70.95), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool (13.73/45.49), and visual analog scale for pain (14.30/22). There were no significant differences in MCID or PASS achievement rates between the 2 groups (P≥ .108). Patients who underwent combined G+L demonstrated comparable PROs and clinically significant outcomes achievement rates to patients who underwent G, highlighting sustained successful outcomes for patients with gluteal tendon pathology and concomitant FAIS and labral tears.

Preoperative patient factors that predict achieving the minimal clinically important difference following arthroscopic treatment of snapping scapula syndrome

The aim of this study was to define minimal clinically important difference (MCID) values for patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after arthroscopic treatment of snapping scapula syndrome (SSS) using a distribution-based method, and to identify demographic, clinical, and intraoperative factors significantly associated with the achievement of MCID. Patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment of SSS between October 2005 and September 2020 with a minimum of 2-year short-term postoperative follow-up were enrolled in this retrospective monocentric study. The MCID was calculated using a distribution-based approach for the following patient-reported outcomes (PROs): 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and VAS pain "today" and "at worst." The association between achievement of the MCID and postoperative subjective satisfaction was investigated and factors associated with achievement of MCID were determined using bivariate analysis. Of a total of 190 patients assessed for eligibility, 77 patients (38.1±14.3 years; 36 females) were included. Within the study population, statistically significant improvements in postoperative SF-12 PCS (p<.001) and MCS (p<0.034), ASES (p<.001), QuickDASH (p<.001), SANE (p<.001), and VAS pain (p<.001) were observed at minimum 2-year follow-up. The calculated MCID threshold values based on the study population were 5.0 for SF-12 PCS, 5.8 for SF-12 MCS, 11.3 for the ASES score, -10.5 for the QuickDASH score, 14.7 for SANE, 1.5 for the VAS pain, and 1.7 for the VAS pain at worst. Reaching the MCID was strongly associated with postoperative satisfaction (rated on a scale of 1-10). Across the PROs, younger age, favorable preoperative response to injection, partial scapuloplasty or scapulectomy, no prior surgery, as well as pain and function at baseline were significantly associated with attaining MCID. Patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment for SSS experienced clinically significant improvements in functional scores, pain, and quality of life. This study demonstrated predictive roles for certain patient-specific factors and diagnostic variables for achieving MCID in PROs, which may help surgeons preoperatively assess preoperatively the probability of success and manage patient expectations.

Effect of Patient Characteristics on the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State Thresholds After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

Background: There is scarce literature on clinically significant values after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR). Purpose: To determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds at 1 year for the Rowe and Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS) scores after ABR and to determine the effect of patient characteristics on these metrics after ABR. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A retrospective review of patients undergoing ABR from a single institution between January 2017 and January 2020 was performed. Patients with at least 1 episode of instability and a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included. The exclusion criteria were as follows: bony defects of >20% on the anteroinferior portion of the glenoid based on a preoperative computed tomography scan; engaging Hill-Sachs lesions at 90° of abduction and 90° of external rotation based on an arthroscopic examination; previous surgery on the same shoulder; multidirectional instability or concomitant repair of full-thickness rotator cuff tears; superior labral anterior to posterior lesions; posterior labral tears; or humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament lesions. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected both preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. Delta was defined as the change between preoperative and 1-year postoperative scores. Distribution-based (one-half the standard deviation of the difference between pre- and postoperative outcome scores) and anchored-based approaches (response to a satisfaction question at 1 year) were used to estimate the MCID and the PASS, respectively. The optimal cutoff point, where sensitivity and specificity were maximized, and the percentage of patients achieving those thresholds were also calculated. Results: Overall, 190 patients were included. The distribution-based MCID for the Rowe and ASOSS scores were calculated to be 8.2 and 8.7, respectively. The rate of patients who achieved MCID thresholds was 96% for the Rowe and 96% for ASOSS scores. The PASS threshold for the Rowe and ASOSS scores were ≥80 and ≥90, respectively. The rate of patients who achieved PASS scores after ABR were 86% and 83%, respectively. The MCID and PASS values showed great variability based on sex (men: 8.5 and ≥85 for Rowe / 8.9 and ≥90 for ASOSS, respectively, vs women: 6.7 and ≥73 for Rowe / 8.1 and ≥75 for ASOSS), age (≥21: 8.4 and ≥80 / 9.2 and ≥90 vs <21: 7.8 and ≥75 / 7.7 and ≥85), sports participation (sports: 8.8 and ≥85 / 9.5 and ≥90 vs no sports: 8.1 and ≥75 / 8.6 and ≥80), and type of athlete (competitive: 8.4 and ≥85 / 8.9 and ≥87 vs recreational: 7.5 and ≥73 / 8.1 and ≥68). Conclusion: This study identified the MCID and PASS thresholds for the Rowe and ASOSS scores at 1 year after ABR. However, these values showed great variability when accounting for different patient characteristics such as sex, age, sports participation, and type of athlete, highlighting the importance of considering individual patient-specific characteristics for optimal treatment decision-making and ensuring treatment success tailored to each patient’s unique needs and expectations.

Hip Arthroscopic Surgery With Chondrolabral Refixation, Osteochondroplasty, and Routine Capsular Closure for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: Clinical Outcomes at a Minimum 10-Year Follow-up

Background: Hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) has proven to be an effective surgical intervention, with high rates of return to sport and work as well as favorable outcomes at short- and midterm follow-up. However, limited data exist on outcomes at long-term follow-up. Purpose: To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at a minimum 10-year follow-up after primary hip arthroscopic surgery including labral repair, femoral osteochondroplasty, acetabular osteochondroplasty, and capsular closure for FAIS. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS between June 2012 and January 2013 were identified. PROs were collected preoperatively and at a minimum of 10 years postoperatively, including the Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score–Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), International Hip Outcome Tool–12 (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction. Unique minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds were calculated, and their rates of achievement were analyzed. An alpha level of <.05 was used to determine statistical significance. Results: A total of 94 patients (55 female; mean age, 34.3 ± 12.4 years) were analyzed with a mean follow-up of 10.1 ± 0.3 years (range, 10.0-10.7 years). Patients demonstrated significant 10-year improvement across all PRO measures (P < .001). MCID and PASS thresholds were calculated as follows: HOS-ADL (10.4 and 85.3, respectively), HOS-SS (14.6 and 60.2, respectively), mHHS (8.8 and 76.0, respectively), VAS pain (14.6 and 27.5, respectively), and iHOT-12 (PASS: 71.4). The majority of patients achieved the MCID and PASS for each PRO measure: HOS-ADL (73.4% and 70.9%, respectively), HOS-SS (78.5% and 77.2%, respectively), mHHS (81.0% and 70.9%, respectively), VAS pain (88.6% and 70.9%, respectively), and iHOT-12 (PASS: 73.4%). Overall, 9 patients (9.6%) underwent subsequent revision hip arthroscopic surgery at a mean 4.9 ± 3.7 years (range, 1.1-10.1 years) postoperatively, and 6 patients (6.4%) underwent conversion to total hip arthroplasty at a mean 4.1 ± 3.1 years (range, 0.9-9.3 years) postoperatively. Conclusion: Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS utilizing contemporary methods of labral repair, acetabular and/or femoral osteochondroplasty, and capsular closure commonly experienced sustained clinical improvement and reported high levels of satisfaction at a minimum 10-year follow-up with low rates of reoperation.

Establishing patient-centered metrics for the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score following medial unicompartmental knee arthropalsty.

This study aimed to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the patient acceptable symptoms state (PASS) threshold for the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) pain subscore, KOOS physical short form (PS), and KOOS joint replacement (JR) following medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (mUKA). Prospectively collected data from 743 patients undergoing mUKA from a single academic institution from April 2015 through March 2020 were analyzed. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected both pre-operatively and 1-year post-operatively. Distribution-based and anchored-based approaches were used to estimate MCIDs and PASS, respectively. The optimal cut-off point and the percentage of patients who achieved PASS were also calculated. MCID for KOOS-pain, KOOS-PS, and KOOS-JR following mUKA were calculated to be 7.6, 7.3, and 6.2, respectively. The PASS threshold for KOOS pain, PS, and JR were 77.8, 70.3, and 70.7, with 68%, 66%, and 64% of patients achieving satisfactory outcomes, respectively. Cut-off values for delta KOOS pain, PS, and JR were found to be 25.7, 14.3, and 20.7 with 73%, 69%, and 68% of patients achieving satisfactory outcomes, respectively. The current study identified useful values for the MCID and PASS thresholds at 1year following medial UKA of KOOS pain, KOOS PS, and KOOS JR scores. These values may be used as targets for surgeons when evaluating PROMS using KOOS to determine whether patients have achieved successful outcomes after their surgical intervention. Potential uses include the integration of these values into predictive models to enhance shared decision-making and guide more informed decisions to optimize patient outcomes. III.

Confirmatory study of the usefulness of quantum molecular resonance and microdissectomy for the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy in a prospective cohort at 6 months follow-up.

Low back pain is a common musculoskeletal complaint and while prognosis is usually favorable, some patients experience persistent pain despite conservative treatment and invasive treatment to target the root cause of the pain may be necessary. The aim of this study is to evaluate patient outcomes after treatment of lumbar radiculopathy (LR) with quantum molecular resonance radiofrequency coblation disc decompression and percutaneous microdiscectomy with grasper forceps (QMRG). This prospective cohort study was carried out in two Spanish hospitals on 58 patients with LR secondary to a contained hydrated lumbar disc hernia or lumbar disc protrusion of more than 6 months of evolution, which persisted despite conservative treatment with analgesia, rehabilitation, and physiotherapy, and/or epidural block, in the previous 2 years. Patients were treated with QMRG and the outcomes were measured mainly using the Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions, Numeric Rating Scale, Oswestry Disability Index, SF12: Short Form 12 Health Survey, Patient Global Impression of Improvement, Clinical Global Impression of Improvement, and Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale. Patients who received QMRG showed significant improvement in their baseline scores at 6 months post-treatment. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold was met by 26-98% of patients, depending on the outcome measure, for non-sleep-related outcomes, and between 17 and 62% for sleep-related outcome measures. Of the 14 outcome measures studied, at least 50% of the patients met the MCID threshold in 8 of them. Treatment of LR with QMRG appears to be effective at 6 months post-intervention.

Patient Reported Outcomes using PROMIS after Tarsal Tunnel Release Surgery

Category: Other Introduction/Purpose: Tarsal tunnel syndrome is an entrapment neuropathy of the tibial nerve and its branches in the tarsal tunnel. The literature on surgical release of the tarsal tunnel shows variable outcomes with no studies reporting validated patient reported outcomes. We aim to determine clinical response after tarsal tunnel release using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Methods: Under an IRB-approved protocol, CPT code 28035 was used to identify patients who underwent isolated tarsal tunnel release (TTR) between 1/1/2015 and 12/15/2022 at a single institution. Patient demographic data and PROMIS CAT physical function (PF), pain interference (PI), and depression scores were prospectively collected at the initial pre-operative clinic visit and in follow-up throughout the episode of care after TTR. The validated distribution-based method (1/2 sd) was used to assess minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Bivariate analysis was used to determine the postoperative recovery after TTR. Statistical significance was set at p&lt; 0.05. Results: A total of 39 patients who underwent tarsal tunnel release were included. The mean age was 49.1 years (19.44-70.75 years) and mean follow-up was 280.9 days (23-1,459 days). The mean PROMIS PF score improved from 38.97 preoperatively to 46.17 postoperatively (p-value= 0.0024). The mean PROMIS PI score improved from 63.75 preoperatively to 57.65 postoperatively (p-value &lt; 0.001). The mean PROMIS depression score improved from 49.78 preoperatively to 43.85 postoperatively (p-value &lt; 0.001). The mean t-score change (pre to post-operation) was 7.2 for PF, -6.1 for PI, and -5.93 for depression. MCID thresholds were calculated as PF increase of 4.7; PI decrease of 3.9; and Depression decrease of 5.1. Fourteen (35%), 24 (62%), and 27 (69%) patients reached MCID for PF, PI, and depression, respectively. Conclusion: This study provides validated outcomes after TTR. Though there is improvement after surgery, the patients still experience some pain and physical limitations. Interestingly, the greatest gains were seen in depression symptoms supporting the idea that mental health is impacted in these chronic compressive neuropathy conditions.

Quantifying success after first revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state.

When patients require revision of primary shoulder arthroplasty, revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is most commonly performed. However, defining clinically important improvement in these patients is challenging because benchmarks have not been previously defined. Our purpose was to define the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for outcome scores and range of motion (ROM) after revision rTSA and to quantify the proportion of patients achieving clinically relevant success. This retrospective cohort study used a prospectively collected single-institution database of patients undergoing first revision rTSA between August 2015 and December 2019. Patients with a diagnosis of periprosthetic fracture or infection were excluded. Outcomes scores included the ASES, raw and normalized Constant, SPADI, SST, and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) scores. ROM measures included abduction, forward elevation (FE), external rotation (ER), and internal rotation (IR) score. Anchor-based and distribution-based methods were used to calculate the MCID, SCB, and PASS. The proportions of patients achieving each threshold were assessed. Ninety-three revision rTSAs with minimum 2-year follow-up were evaluated. Mean age was 67 years, 56% were female, and average follow-up was 54 months. Revision rTSA was performed most commonly for failed anatomic TSA (n=47), followed by hemiarthroplasty (n=21), rTSA (n=15), and resurfacing (n=10). The indication for revision rTSA was most commonly glenoid loosening (n=24), followed by rotator cuff failure (n=23), subluxation and unexplained pain (n=11 for both). The anchor-based MCID thresholds (% of patients achieving) were as follows: ASES,20.1 (42%); normalized Constant,12.6 (80%); UCLA,10.2 (54%); SST,0.9 (78%); SPADI,-18.4 (58%); abduction,13° (83%); FE,18° (82%); ER,4° (49%); and IR,0.8 (34%). The SCB thresholds (% of patients achieving) were as follows: ASES,34.1 (25%); normalized Constant,26.6 (43%); UCLA,14.1 (28%); SST,3.9 (48%); SPADI,-36.4 (33%); abduction,20° (77%); FE,28° (71%); ER,15° (15%); and IR,1.0 (29%). The PASS thresholds (% of patients achieving) were as follows: ASES,63.5 (53%); normalized Constant,59.1 (61%); UCLA,25.4 (48%); SST,7.0 (55%); SPADI,42.4 (59%); abduction,98° (61%); FE,110° (56%); ER,19° (73%); and IR,3.3 (59%). This study establishes thresholds for the MCID, SCB, and PASS at minimum 2-years after revision rTSA, providing physicians an evidence-based method to counsel patients and assess patient outcomes postoperatively.