Ashna Mahadev, Dorina Kallogjeri, Jay F Piccirillo
{"title":"验证最小临床重要差异(MCID)的宾夕法尼亚大学气味识别测试(UPSIT)。","authors":"Ashna Mahadev, Dorina Kallogjeri, Jay F Piccirillo","doi":"10.1177/19458924231218037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test is widely used to measure change in olfactory function, but a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) has not been well-established. A study published in 1997 regarding patients with head trauma reported an MCID of 4 but did not detail the methods used in the calculation.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To validate the MCID for UPSIT in patients with postviral, sinusitis, and procedure-associated olfactory loss.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from 5 clinical research studies related to olfactory function. Three studies included subjects with COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction, one with chronic sinusitis subjects, and one with subjects undergoing transsphenoidal surgery. All subjects had completed a baseline and follow-up UPSIT, baseline and follow-up Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-Severity), and a follow-up CGI-Improvement. Both distribution- and anchor-based methods were used to determine the MCID of UPSIT. Distribution-based method calculated MCID using half standard deviation of baseline UPSIT and delta UPSIT scores. Clinical-anchor method determined MCID by comparing delta UPSIT scores between <i>consecutive</i> CGI-I clinical categories ranging from very much better to very much worse.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study population comprised 295 subjects. Subjects had a mean (SD) baseline UPSIT score of 27 (7.5), and follow-up score of 28 (7.9), and a mean UPSIT change of 0.6 (5.8). Half the baseline UPSIT SD was 3.75 and half the delta UPSIT SD was 2.9. With the anchor-based approach, an MCID of 4 was defined as clinically meaningful by exploring the relationship between delta UPSIT and CGI-Improvement. Using a more conservative approach based on the MCID values identified from both methods, we determined that a change of 4 or greater is the appropriate MCID for UPSIT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Investigators in the future should use 4 as MCID for UPSIT and report the percentage of study subjects who achieve a clinically meaningful difference.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>","PeriodicalId":7650,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy","volume":" ","pages":"123-132"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT).\",\"authors\":\"Ashna Mahadev, Dorina Kallogjeri, Jay F Piccirillo\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19458924231218037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test is widely used to measure change in olfactory function, but a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) has not been well-established. A study published in 1997 regarding patients with head trauma reported an MCID of 4 but did not detail the methods used in the calculation.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To validate the MCID for UPSIT in patients with postviral, sinusitis, and procedure-associated olfactory loss.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from 5 clinical research studies related to olfactory function. Three studies included subjects with COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction, one with chronic sinusitis subjects, and one with subjects undergoing transsphenoidal surgery. All subjects had completed a baseline and follow-up UPSIT, baseline and follow-up Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-Severity), and a follow-up CGI-Improvement. Both distribution- and anchor-based methods were used to determine the MCID of UPSIT. Distribution-based method calculated MCID using half standard deviation of baseline UPSIT and delta UPSIT scores. Clinical-anchor method determined MCID by comparing delta UPSIT scores between <i>consecutive</i> CGI-I clinical categories ranging from very much better to very much worse.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study population comprised 295 subjects. Subjects had a mean (SD) baseline UPSIT score of 27 (7.5), and follow-up score of 28 (7.9), and a mean UPSIT change of 0.6 (5.8). Half the baseline UPSIT SD was 3.75 and half the delta UPSIT SD was 2.9. With the anchor-based approach, an MCID of 4 was defined as clinically meaningful by exploring the relationship between delta UPSIT and CGI-Improvement. Using a more conservative approach based on the MCID values identified from both methods, we determined that a change of 4 or greater is the appropriate MCID for UPSIT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Investigators in the future should use 4 as MCID for UPSIT and report the percentage of study subjects who achieve a clinically meaningful difference.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"123-132\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19458924231218037\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19458924231218037","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Validation of Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT).
Background: The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test is widely used to measure change in olfactory function, but a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) has not been well-established. A study published in 1997 regarding patients with head trauma reported an MCID of 4 but did not detail the methods used in the calculation.
Objective: To validate the MCID for UPSIT in patients with postviral, sinusitis, and procedure-associated olfactory loss.
Methods: This was a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from 5 clinical research studies related to olfactory function. Three studies included subjects with COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction, one with chronic sinusitis subjects, and one with subjects undergoing transsphenoidal surgery. All subjects had completed a baseline and follow-up UPSIT, baseline and follow-up Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-Severity), and a follow-up CGI-Improvement. Both distribution- and anchor-based methods were used to determine the MCID of UPSIT. Distribution-based method calculated MCID using half standard deviation of baseline UPSIT and delta UPSIT scores. Clinical-anchor method determined MCID by comparing delta UPSIT scores between consecutive CGI-I clinical categories ranging from very much better to very much worse.
Results: The study population comprised 295 subjects. Subjects had a mean (SD) baseline UPSIT score of 27 (7.5), and follow-up score of 28 (7.9), and a mean UPSIT change of 0.6 (5.8). Half the baseline UPSIT SD was 3.75 and half the delta UPSIT SD was 2.9. With the anchor-based approach, an MCID of 4 was defined as clinically meaningful by exploring the relationship between delta UPSIT and CGI-Improvement. Using a more conservative approach based on the MCID values identified from both methods, we determined that a change of 4 or greater is the appropriate MCID for UPSIT.
Conclusion: Investigators in the future should use 4 as MCID for UPSIT and report the percentage of study subjects who achieve a clinically meaningful difference.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy is a peer-reviewed, scientific publication committed to expanding knowledge and publishing the best clinical and basic research within the fields of Rhinology & Allergy. Its focus is to publish information which contributes to improved quality of care for patients with nasal and sinus disorders. Its primary readership consists of otolaryngologists, allergists, and plastic surgeons. Published material includes peer-reviewed original research, clinical trials, and review articles.