Revised minimal important difference values for the visual analogue scale and Foot Health Status Questionnaire when used for plantar heel pain.

IF 2.5 3区医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Foot and Ankle Research Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1002/jfa2.70021

Karl B Landorf, Georgia N Twyford, Matthew P Cotchett, Glen A Whittaker

{"title":"Revised minimal important difference values for the visual analogue scale and Foot Health Status Questionnaire when used for plantar heel pain.","authors":"Karl B Landorf, Georgia N Twyford, Matthew P Cotchett, Glen A Whittaker","doi":"10.1002/jfa2.70021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ) are patient-reported outcome measures that are frequently used to evaluate the management of plantar heel pain. This study aimed to re-calculate (i.e. revise) the minimal important differences (MIDs) of the VAS and the FHSQ when used for plantar heel pain to enhance the validity and precision of previous estimates.Methods: This study used an anchor-based method to calculate MIDs and incorporated best-practice analyses to ensure credibility of the estimates. Data from 369 participants previously recruited from the community into four randomised controlled trials that evaluated interventions for plantar heel pain were used. VAS and FHSQ data from these participants at baseline and follow-up were pooled to calculate the MIDs (95% confidence intervals). A 15-point global rating of change Likert scale was used at follow-up as the transition scale, which was anchored to baseline. For the VAS, MIDs for two distinct types of pain were calculated: average pain and first-step pain. For the FHSQ, MIDs for two domains were calculated: foot pain and foot function.Results: The revised MIDs for the 100 mm VAS were -8.5 mm (95% CI: -12.2 to -4.7) for average pain and -19.2 mm (95% CI: -24.7 to -13.8) for first-step pain, which represent improvements in pain. The MIDs for the FHSQ were 12.4 points (95% CI: 6.9 to 18.0) for foot pain and 6.4 points (95% CI: 0.9 to 11.9) for foot function, which represent improvements in foot health status.Conclusions: The revised MIDs from this study for the VAS and the FHSQ when used for plantar heel pain have enhanced validity and precision compared to previous estimates. This is important for clinicians and researchers as it provides a better understanding of how much improvement is required by an individual before an important change is experienced. The revised MIDs will also assist researchers with prospective sample size calculations, so future clinical trials are appropriately powered from a statistical standpoint.","PeriodicalId":49164,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foot and Ankle Research","volume":"17 4","pages":"e70021"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Foot and Ankle Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jfa2.70021","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ) are patient-reported outcome measures that are frequently used to evaluate the management of plantar heel pain. This study aimed to re-calculate (i.e. revise) the minimal important differences (MIDs) of the VAS and the FHSQ when used for plantar heel pain to enhance the validity and precision of previous estimates.

Methods: This study used an anchor-based method to calculate MIDs and incorporated best-practice analyses to ensure credibility of the estimates. Data from 369 participants previously recruited from the community into four randomised controlled trials that evaluated interventions for plantar heel pain were used. VAS and FHSQ data from these participants at baseline and follow-up were pooled to calculate the MIDs (95% confidence intervals). A 15-point global rating of change Likert scale was used at follow-up as the transition scale, which was anchored to baseline. For the VAS, MIDs for two distinct types of pain were calculated: average pain and first-step pain. For the FHSQ, MIDs for two domains were calculated: foot pain and foot function.

Results: The revised MIDs for the 100 mm VAS were -8.5 mm (95% CI: -12.2 to -4.7) for average pain and -19.2 mm (95% CI: -24.7 to -13.8) for first-step pain, which represent improvements in pain. The MIDs for the FHSQ were 12.4 points (95% CI: 6.9 to 18.0) for foot pain and 6.4 points (95% CI: 0.9 to 11.9) for foot function, which represent improvements in foot health status.

Conclusions: The revised MIDs from this study for the VAS and the FHSQ when used for plantar heel pain have enhanced validity and precision compared to previous estimates. This is important for clinicians and researchers as it provides a better understanding of how much improvement is required by an individual before an important change is experienced. The revised MIDs will also assist researchers with prospective sample size calculations, so future clinical trials are appropriately powered from a statistical standpoint.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

背景：视觉模拟量表（VAS）和足部健康状况问卷（FHSQ）是患者报告的结果测量方法，常用于评估足跟痛的治疗效果。本研究旨在重新计算（即修订）视觉模拟量表和足部健康状况调查表用于足跟痛时的最小重要差异（MIDs），以提高之前估计值的有效性和精确性：本研究采用基于锚的方法计算最小重要差异，并纳入最佳实践分析，以确保估计值的可信度。研究使用了之前从社区招募的 369 名参与者的数据，这些参与者参加了四项评估足跟痛干预措施的随机对照试验。将这些参与者在基线和随访期间的 VAS 和 FHSQ 数据进行汇总，计算出中位数（95% 置信区间）。随访时使用 15 分的总体变化李克特量表作为过渡量表，该量表与基线锚定。对于 VAS，计算了两种不同类型疼痛的中位数：平均疼痛和第一步疼痛。对于 FHSQ，计算了两个领域的中位数：足部疼痛和足部功能：修订后的 100 毫米 VAS 平均疼痛中位数为-8.5 毫米（95% CI：-12.2 至-4.7），第一步疼痛中位数为-19.2 毫米（95% CI：-24.7 至-13.8），这代表疼痛有所改善。FHSQ 的中位数分别为：足部疼痛 12.4 分（95% CI：6.9 至 18.0），足部功能 6.4 分（95% CI：0.9 至 11.9），代表足部健康状况有所改善：本研究修订的 VAS 和 FHSQ 中值用于足跟痛时，与之前的估计值相比，有效性和精确性都有所提高。这对于临床医生和研究人员来说非常重要，因为他们可以更好地了解个人需要改善多少才能体验到重要的变化。修订后的中位数还将有助于研究人员进行前瞻性样本量计算，从而使未来的临床试验从统计学角度获得适当的动力。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Foot and Ankle Research ORTHOPEDICS-

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

10.30%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, the official journal of the Australian Podiatry Association and The College of Podiatry (UK), is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of policy, organisation, delivery and clinical practice related to the assessment, diagnosis, prevention and management of foot and ankle disorders. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research covers a wide range of clinical subject areas, including diabetology, paediatrics, sports medicine, gerontology and geriatrics, foot surgery, physical therapy, dermatology, wound management, radiology, biomechanics and bioengineering, orthotics and prosthetics, as well the broad areas of epidemiology, policy, organisation and delivery of services related to foot and ankle care. The journal encourages submissions from all health professionals who manage lower limb conditions, including podiatrists, nurses, physical therapists and physiotherapists, orthopaedists, manual therapists, medical specialists and general medical practitioners, as well as health service researchers concerned with foot and ankle care. The Australian Podiatry Association and the College of Podiatry (UK) have reserve funds to cover the article-processing charge for manuscripts submitted by its members. Society members can email the appropriate contact at Australian Podiatry Association or The College of Podiatry to obtain the corresponding code to enter on submission.