目的确定膝骨关节炎患者全膝关节置换后美国特种外科医院膝关节评分(hospital for special surgery knee score,HSS)的最小临床重要差异(minimal clinically important difference,MCID)。方法回顾性分析2017年1月-2018年6月解放军总医...目的确定膝骨关节炎患者全膝关节置换后美国特种外科医院膝关节评分(hospital for special surgery knee score,HSS)的最小临床重要差异(minimal clinically important difference,MCID)。方法回顾性分析2017年1月-2018年6月解放军总医院第一医学中心关节外科诊断为膝骨关节炎并行单侧全膝关节置换治疗的患者。记录患者术前HSS评分、术后1年的HSS评分及术后1年满意度调查结果。采用锚法(Anchor-based approach)将患者满意度作为分组指标,简单线性回归分析确定HSS评分的MCID。结果413例患者的平均年龄(66.0±7.8)岁,男性93例(22.5%),女性320例(77.5%)。全膝关节置换后1年HSS评分平均提高34.33分(95%CI:33.11~35.54)。术后1年满意度评价极其满意59例,非常满意131例,满意177例,一般34例,不满意/糟糕12例;各组患者术前和术后1年HSS评分均有改变:极其满意组44.96(95%CI:42.51~47.41),非常满意组38.44(95%CI:36.74~40.14),比较满意组32.26(95%CI:30.71~33.81),一般组20.45(95%CI:17.35~23.55),不满意/糟糕组8.08(95%CI:2.83~13.34)。HSS评分的MCID为9.18(95%CI:6.37~11.98)。结论本研究确定了膝骨关节炎患者全膝关节置换后HSS评分的最小临床重要差异为9.18分,建议膝骨关节炎患者全膝关节置换治疗1年后HSS评分变化高于此分数作为有临床意义的评价阈值。展开更多
目的评估皮肤病生活质量指数（dermatology life quality index，DLQ1）在寻常性银屑病患者进行临床研究中的临床最小重要差值（minimal clinical important differences，MCID）。方法依托在2个中心进行的临床试验“耳穴贴压加西药局...目的评估皮肤病生活质量指数（dermatology life quality index，DLQ1）在寻常性银屑病患者进行临床研究中的临床最小重要差值（minimal clinical important differences，MCID）。方法依托在2个中心进行的临床试验“耳穴贴压加西药局部用药治疗寻常性银屑病的随机对照研究”（注册号为：ChiCTR—TRC．14004916）进行评估。该研究纳入100例合格病例，随机分成治疗组（51例）采用耳穴叠加得肤宝外用治疗和对照组（49例）单纯采用得肤宝外用治疗。在治疗的0周、4周让患者自行填写DLQI进行生活质量评估，并采用分布法和效标法分别对DLQI的耳穴治疗寻常性银屑病患者中MCID进行估算。结果在这个临床研究中，采用分布法估算的DLQI的MCID波动于0．23—2．58之间，采用效标法估算的MCID值为2．53。结论本研究中DLQI的临床最小重要差异值为2．53，代表患者评分下降2．53时皮损达到好转；使用效标法和分布法评估DLQI的MCID，对临床及量表研究具有重要的参考价值。展开更多
[目的]制定糖尿病患者生命质量测定量表QLICD-DM(V2.0)的最小临床重要性差值(Minimal Clinical Important Difference,MCID)。[方法]采用慢性病患者生命质量测定量表体系之糖尿病量表QLICD-DM(V2.0)及SF-36量表对154名糖尿病患者进行问...[目的]制定糖尿病患者生命质量测定量表QLICD-DM(V2.0)的最小临床重要性差值(Minimal Clinical Important Difference,MCID)。[方法]采用慢性病患者生命质量测定量表体系之糖尿病量表QLICD-DM(V2.0)及SF-36量表对154名糖尿病患者进行问卷调查,分别采用以锚为基础和以分布为基础的研究方法制定最小临床重要性差值,分析比较取平均值法、取小值法和取大值法制定的最小临床重要性差值。[结果]取平均值法得到的生理功能、心理功能、社会功能、共性模块、特异模块和量表总分的MCID为5.05、5.73、3.88、4.73、6.18和5.20;取小值法得到各领域的MCID分别为3.95、2.21、0.41、3.09、3.56和3.68;取大值法得到的各领域MCID分别为6.14、9.24、7.34、6.37、8.80和6.72。[结论]三种方法计算的MCID,在心理功能、社会功能领域相差较大,而其他领域中相差较小。最终以取平均值法的结果作为QLICD-DM(V2.0)的MCID,为应用生命质量判断糖尿病患者的临床疗效提供参考依据,解决仅通过P值解释结果的局限性。展开更多
AIM: To investigate the Chinese version of the Low Vision Quality of Life Questionnaire(CLVQOL) as an instrument for obtaining clinically important changes after cataract surgery.METHODS: Patients underwent cataract s...AIM: To investigate the Chinese version of the Low Vision Quality of Life Questionnaire(CLVQOL) as an instrument for obtaining clinically important changes after cataract surgery.METHODS: Patients underwent cataract surgery in Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, who fit the inclusion criteria were recruited. Two CLVQOLs were administered, including a preoperative CLVQOL and a CLVQOL at the end of the 3 mo follow-up period, and were completed using face-to-face interviews or phone interviews conducted by trained investigators. The minimal clinically important difference(MCID) was calculated using an anchor-based method and a distribution method. In addition, the responsiveness of the questionnaire was measured.RESULTS: A total of 155 residents were enrolled. The average visual acuity(VA) preoperatively was 0.08(SD=0.05), and it increased to 0.47(SD=0.28) at the end of followup. Statistically significant positive changes in the CLVQOL scores indicated significant improvement of vision related quality of life after cataract surgery. With the larger value between the two results as the final value, the MCID values of the CLVQOL(scores of the four scales as well as the total score) were 8.94, 2.61, 4.34, 3.10 and 17.63, respectively. The CLVQOL has both good internal and external responsiveness.CONCLUSION: CLVQOL scores are appropriate instruments for obtaining clinically important changes after cataract surgery. This study is an effective exploration for establishingcataract surgery efficacy standards, which helps clinical and scientific research workers in ophthalmology to gain a more in-depth understanding when using CLVQOL.展开更多
文摘目的确定膝骨关节炎患者全膝关节置换后美国特种外科医院膝关节评分(hospital for special surgery knee score,HSS)的最小临床重要差异(minimal clinically important difference,MCID)。方法回顾性分析2017年1月-2018年6月解放军总医院第一医学中心关节外科诊断为膝骨关节炎并行单侧全膝关节置换治疗的患者。记录患者术前HSS评分、术后1年的HSS评分及术后1年满意度调查结果。采用锚法(Anchor-based approach)将患者满意度作为分组指标,简单线性回归分析确定HSS评分的MCID。结果413例患者的平均年龄(66.0±7.8)岁,男性93例(22.5%),女性320例(77.5%)。全膝关节置换后1年HSS评分平均提高34.33分(95%CI:33.11~35.54)。术后1年满意度评价极其满意59例,非常满意131例,满意177例,一般34例,不满意/糟糕12例;各组患者术前和术后1年HSS评分均有改变:极其满意组44.96(95%CI:42.51~47.41),非常满意组38.44(95%CI:36.74~40.14),比较满意组32.26(95%CI:30.71~33.81),一般组20.45(95%CI:17.35~23.55),不满意/糟糕组8.08(95%CI:2.83~13.34)。HSS评分的MCID为9.18(95%CI:6.37~11.98)。结论本研究确定了膝骨关节炎患者全膝关节置换后HSS评分的最小临床重要差异为9.18分,建议膝骨关节炎患者全膝关节置换治疗1年后HSS评分变化高于此分数作为有临床意义的评价阈值。
文摘目的评估皮肤病生活质量指数（dermatology life quality index，DLQ1）在寻常性银屑病患者进行临床研究中的临床最小重要差值（minimal clinical important differences，MCID）。方法依托在2个中心进行的临床试验“耳穴贴压加西药局部用药治疗寻常性银屑病的随机对照研究”（注册号为：ChiCTR—TRC．14004916）进行评估。该研究纳入100例合格病例，随机分成治疗组（51例）采用耳穴叠加得肤宝外用治疗和对照组（49例）单纯采用得肤宝外用治疗。在治疗的0周、4周让患者自行填写DLQI进行生活质量评估，并采用分布法和效标法分别对DLQI的耳穴治疗寻常性银屑病患者中MCID进行估算。结果在这个临床研究中，采用分布法估算的DLQI的MCID波动于0．23—2．58之间，采用效标法估算的MCID值为2．53。结论本研究中DLQI的临床最小重要差异值为2．53，代表患者评分下降2．53时皮损达到好转；使用效标法和分布法评估DLQI的MCID，对临床及量表研究具有重要的参考价值。
文摘[目的]制定糖尿病患者生命质量测定量表QLICD-DM(V2.0)的最小临床重要性差值(Minimal Clinical Important Difference,MCID)。[方法]采用慢性病患者生命质量测定量表体系之糖尿病量表QLICD-DM(V2.0)及SF-36量表对154名糖尿病患者进行问卷调查,分别采用以锚为基础和以分布为基础的研究方法制定最小临床重要性差值,分析比较取平均值法、取小值法和取大值法制定的最小临床重要性差值。[结果]取平均值法得到的生理功能、心理功能、社会功能、共性模块、特异模块和量表总分的MCID为5.05、5.73、3.88、4.73、6.18和5.20;取小值法得到各领域的MCID分别为3.95、2.21、0.41、3.09、3.56和3.68;取大值法得到的各领域MCID分别为6.14、9.24、7.34、6.37、8.80和6.72。[结论]三种方法计算的MCID,在心理功能、社会功能领域相差较大,而其他领域中相差较小。最终以取平均值法的结果作为QLICD-DM(V2.0)的MCID,为应用生命质量判断糖尿病患者的临床疗效提供参考依据,解决仅通过P值解释结果的局限性。
文摘AIM: To investigate the Chinese version of the Low Vision Quality of Life Questionnaire(CLVQOL) as an instrument for obtaining clinically important changes after cataract surgery.METHODS: Patients underwent cataract surgery in Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, who fit the inclusion criteria were recruited. Two CLVQOLs were administered, including a preoperative CLVQOL and a CLVQOL at the end of the 3 mo follow-up period, and were completed using face-to-face interviews or phone interviews conducted by trained investigators. The minimal clinically important difference(MCID) was calculated using an anchor-based method and a distribution method. In addition, the responsiveness of the questionnaire was measured.RESULTS: A total of 155 residents were enrolled. The average visual acuity(VA) preoperatively was 0.08(SD=0.05), and it increased to 0.47(SD=0.28) at the end of followup. Statistically significant positive changes in the CLVQOL scores indicated significant improvement of vision related quality of life after cataract surgery. With the larger value between the two results as the final value, the MCID values of the CLVQOL(scores of the four scales as well as the total score) were 8.94, 2.61, 4.34, 3.10 and 17.63, respectively. The CLVQOL has both good internal and external responsiveness.CONCLUSION: CLVQOL scores are appropriate instruments for obtaining clinically important changes after cataract surgery. This study is an effective exploration for establishingcataract surgery efficacy standards, which helps clinical and scientific research workers in ophthalmology to gain a more in-depth understanding when using CLVQOL.
