title: Determining the clinical importance of treatment benefits for interventions for painful orthopedic conditions.
abstract: The overarching goals of treatments for orthopedic conditions are generally to improve or restore function and alleviate pain. Results of clinical trials are generally used to determine whether a treatment is efficacious; however, a statistically significant improvement may not actually be clinically important, i.e., meaningful to the patient. To determine whether an intervention has produced clinically important benefits requires a two-step process: first, determining the magnitude of change considered clinically important for a particular measure in the relevant population and, second, applying this yardstick to a patient's data to determine whether s/he has benefited from treatment. Several metrics have been devised to quantify clinically important differences, including the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and clinically important difference (CID). Herein, we review the methods to generate the MCID and other metrics and their use and interpretation in clinical trials and practice. We particularly highlight the many pitfalls associated with the generation and utilization of these metrics that can impair their correct use. These pitfalls include the fact that different pain measures yield different MCIDs, that efficacy in clinical trials is impacted by various factors (population characteristics, trial design), that the MCID value is impacted by the method used to calculate it (anchor, distribution), by the type of anchor chosen and by the definition (threshold) of improvement. The MCID is also dependent on the population characteristics such as disease type and severity, sex, age, etc. For appropriate use, the MCID should be applied to changes in individual subjects, not to group changes. The MCID and CID are useful tools to define general guidelines to determine whether a treatment produces clinically meaningful effects. However, the many pitfalls associated with these metrics require a detailed understanding of the methods to calculate them and their context of use. Orthopedic surgeons that will use these metrics need to carefully understand them and be aware of their pitfalls.
authors: Analgesic Solutions, 232 Pond Street, Natick, MA, 01760, USA. nkatz@analgesicsolutions.com.|Tufts University School of Medicine, 274 Tremont Street, Boston, MA, 02111, USA. nkatz@analgesicsolutions.com.
authors: Nathaniel P
authors: NP
authors: Katz
authors: Analgesic Solutions, 232 Pond Street, Natick, MA, 01760, USA. fpaillard@analgesicsolutions.com.
authors: Florence C
authors: FC
authors: Paillard
authors: Tufts University School of Medicine, 274 Tremont Street, Boston, MA, 02111, USA. evanekman@earthlink.net.|Appalachian Regional Orthopaedic & Sports Medicine Center, Appalachian State University Department of Athletics, 870 State Farm Road, Suite 100, Boone, NC, 28607, USA. evanekman@earthlink.net.
authors: Evan
authors: E
authors: Ekman
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D019637:Orthopedic Procedures; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care / Q000379:methods*
references: J Neurosurg Spine. 2013 Jan;18(1):102-6
references: 23157276
references: J Rheumatol. 2003 Jul;30(7):1648-54
references: 12858473
references: J Gen Intern Med. 2002 Jun;17(6):469-76
references: 12133163
references: J Rheumatol. 2001 Feb;28(2):406-12
references: 11246688
references: Control Clin Trials. 1989 Dec;10(4):407-15
references: 2691207
references: J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013 Sep;21(9):571-6
references: 23996988
references: Spine J. 2010 Jun;10(6):469-74
references: 20359958
references: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2012 Apr;64(4):563-72
references: 22183807
references: Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013 Dec;21(12):2006-12
references: 24095837
references: Spine J. 2008 Nov-Dec;8(6):968-74
references: 18201937
references: Oncologist. 2008 Nov;13(11):1129-33
references: 18984874
references: Ann Rheum Dis. 2005 Jan;64(1):29-33
references: 15208174
references: J Neurosurg Spine. 2013 Nov;19(5):564-8
references: 24010900
references: J Rheumatol. 2000 Nov;27(11):2635-41
references: 11093446
references: Arthritis Rheum. 2001 Aug;45(4):384-91
references: 11501727
references: Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
references: 2868172
references: Qual Life Res. 2007 Feb;16(1):131-42
references: 17033901
references: J Rheumatol. 1999 Mar;26(3):731-9
references: 10090192
references: J Neurosurg Spine. 2013 Feb;18(2):154-60
references: 23176164
references: Acta Orthop. 2013 Apr;84(2):196-201
references: 23506164
references: J Pain. 2008 Feb;9(2):105-21
references: 18055266
references: Arthroscopy. 2014 Jan;30(1):86-9
references: 24384274
references: Int J Inflam. 2011;2011:231926
references: 21755025
references: J Neurosurg Spine. 2013 Oct;19(4):454-63
references: 23971765
references: Spine J. 2007 Sep-Oct;7(5):541-6
references: 17448732
references: J Rheumatol. 2001 Feb;28(2):400-5
references: 11246687
references: Pain. 2001 Nov;94(2):149-158
references: 11690728
references: Med Care. 2003 May;41(5):582-92
references: 12719681
references: Pain. 2009 Dec;146(3):238-244
references: 19836888
references: Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2007 Mar;15(3):273-80
references: 17052924