1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Estimating Minimal Clinically Important Differences for Knee Range of Motion after Stroke

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The importance of knee sagittal kinematic parameters, as a predictor of walking performance in post-stroke gait has been emphasised by numerous researchers. However, no studies so far were designed to determine the minimal clinically important differences (MCID), i.e., the smallest difference in the relevant score for the kinematic gait parameters, which are perceived as beneficial for patients with stroke. Studies focusing on clinically important difference are useful because they can identify the clinical relevance of changes in the scores. The purpose of the study was to estimate the MCID for knee range of motion (ROM) in the sagittal plane for the affected and unaffected side at a chronic stage post-stroke. Fifty individuals were identified in a database of a rehabilitation clinic. We estimated MCID values using: an anchor-based method, distribution-based method, linear regression analysis and specification of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. In the anchor-based study, the mean change in knee flexion/extension ROM for the affected/unaffected side in the MCID group amounted to 8.48°/6.81° (the first MCID estimate). In the distribution-based study, the standard error of measurement for the no-change group was 1.86°/5.63° (the second MCID estimate). Method 3 analyses showed 7.71°/4.66° change in the ROM corresponding to 1.85-point change in the Barthel Index. The best cut-off point, determined with ROC curve, was the value corresponding to 3.9°/3.8° of change in the knee sagittal ROM for the affected/unaffected side (the fourth MCID estimate). We have determined that, in chronic stroke, MCID estimates of knee sagittal ROM for the affected side amount to 8.48° and for the unaffected side to 6.81°. These findings will assist clinicians and researchers in interpreting the significance of changes observed in kinematic sagittal plane parameters of the knee. The data are part of the following clinical trial: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12617000436370

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference.

          In recent years quality of life instruments have been featured as primary outcomes in many randomized trials. One of the challenges facing the investigator using such measures is determining the significance of any differences observed, and communicating that significance to clinicians who will be applying the trial results. We have developed an approach to elucidating the significance of changes in score in quality of life instruments by comparing them to global ratings of change. Using this approach we have established a plausible range within which the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) falls. In three studies in which instruments measuring dyspnea, fatigue, and emotional function in patients with chronic heart and lung disease were applied the MCID was represented by mean change in score of approximately 0.5 per item, when responses were presented on a seven point Likert scale. Furthermore, we have established ranges for changes in questionnaire scores that correspond to moderate and large changes in the domains of interest. This information will be useful in interpreting questionnaire scores, both in individuals and in groups of patients participating in controlled trials, and in the planning of new trials.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            A gait analysis data collection and reduction technique

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The reliability of three-dimensional kinematic gait measurements: a systematic review.

              Three-dimensional kinematic measures of gait are routinely used in clinical gait analysis and provide a key outcome measure for gait research and clinical practice. This systematic review identifies and evaluates current evidence for the inter-session and inter-assessor reliability of three-dimensional kinematic gait analysis (3DGA) data. A targeted search strategy identified reports that fulfilled the search criteria. The quality of full-text reports were tabulated and evaluated for quality using a customised critical appraisal tool. Fifteen full manuscripts and eight abstracts were included. Studies addressed both within-assessor and between-assessor reliability, with most examining healthy adults. Four full-text reports evaluated reliability in people with gait pathologies. The highest reliability indices occurred in the hip and knee in the sagittal plane, with lowest errors in pelvic rotation and obliquity and hip abduction. Lowest reliability and highest error frequently occurred in the hip and knee transverse plane. Methodological quality varied, with key limitations in sample descriptions and strategies for statistical analysis. Reported reliability indices and error magnitudes varied across gait variables and studies. Most studies providing estimates of data error reported values (S.D. or S.E.) of less than 5 degrees , with the exception of hip and knee rotation. This review provides evidence that clinically acceptable errors are possible in gait analysis. Variability between studies, however, suggests that they are not always achieved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Clin Med
                J Clin Med
                jcm
                Journal of Clinical Medicine
                MDPI
                2077-0383
                15 October 2020
                October 2020
                : 9
                : 10
                : 3305
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Physiotherapy, Institute of Health Sciences, Medical College, University of Rzeszów, 35-959 Rzeszów, Poland; mdruzb@ 123456ur.edu.pl (M.D.); wolan.a@ 123456gmail.com (A.W.-N.)
                [2 ]Laboratory of Kinematics and Robotics IRCCS San Camillo Hospital, 30126 Venice, Italy; andrea.turolla@ 123456ospedalesancamillo.net
                [3 ]Azienda ULSS 3 Serenissima Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Unit, 30126 Venice, Italy; pawelkiper@ 123456hotmail.com
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: agnieszkadepa2@ 123456wp.pl ; Tel.: +48-17-872-1153; Fax: +48-17-872-19-30
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4582-4383
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4511-8419
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1609-8060
                Article
                jcm-09-03305
                10.3390/jcm9103305
                7602397
                33076214
                e85e4ab5-8482-44e7-afc7-eae039e14b44
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 14 September 2020
                : 11 October 2020
                Categories
                Article

                stroke,minimal clinically important difference,gait,hemiplegia

                Comments

                Comment on this article