Responsiveness and minimal important change for the quick-DASH in patients with shoulder disorders

Cecilie Rud Budtz, Johan Hviid Andersen, Nils-Bo de Vos Andersen, David Høyrup Christiansen, Cecilie Rud Budtz, Johan Hviid Andersen, Nils-Bo de Vos Andersen, David Høyrup Christiansen

Abstract

Background: Responsiveness and minimal important change (MIC) are central measurement properties when interpreting scores from health questionnaires. The aim of the study was to evaluate the responsiveness and MIC of the Danish version of the shortened version the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (Quick-DASH) in patients with shoulder disorders referred to primary care physiotherapy treatment.

Methods: The study included 261 patients who completed questionnaires at baseline and 3 and 6 months follow up. Absolute and relative change scores was analysed using receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC) curve analysis with the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) as external anchor.

Results: At both 3 and 6 months follow up, the Area under the Curve (ROC AUC) exceeded 0.70 and MIC was 9.1 and 13.6 at 3 and 6 months respectively.

Conclusion: The Danish version of the Quick-DASH demonstrated adequate ability to measure changes in disability over 3 and 6 months in patients with shoulder disorders undergoing primary care physiotherapy treatment.

Keywords: Outcome measure; Quick-DASH; Responsiveness.

Conflict of interest statement

Author’s information

N/A.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All participants signed written informed consent forms and the study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (No. 2012–58-006). Under Danish law this study did not need ethics approval (Act on Research Ethics Review of Health Research Projects, October 2013) [23].

Consent for publication

N/A.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Receiver-Operating-Characteristics (ROC) curve for the Quick-DASH at 3 months (upper) and 6 months (lower) follow up. The point nearest the upper left hand corner represents the minimal important change (MIC ROC)

References

    1. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The upper extremity collaborative group (UECG) Am J Ind Med. 1996;29(6):602–608. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:6<602::AID-AJIM4>;2-L.
    1. Beaton DE, Wright JG, Katz JN, Upper Extremity Collaborative Group Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(5):1038–1046.
    1. Herup A, Merser S, Boeckstyns M. Validation of questionnaire for conditions of the upper extremity. Ugeskr Laeger. 2010;172(48):3333–3336.
    1. Lundquist CB, Dossing K, Christiansen DH. Responsiveness of a Danish version of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) questionnaire. Dan Med J. 2014;61(4):A4813.
    1. Schonnemann JO, Eggers J. Validation of the Danish version of the quick-disabilities of arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire. Dan Med J. 2016;63(12):A5306.
    1. Boeckstyns ME, Merser S. Psychometric properties of two questionnaires in the context of total wrist arthroplasty. Dan Med J. 2014;61(11):A4939.
    1. Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(2):102–109. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012.
    1. Kennedy CA, Beaton DE, Smith P, Van Eerd D, Tang K, Inrig T, et al. Measurement properties of the QuickDASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) outcome measure and cross-cultural adaptations of the QuickDASH: a systematic review. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(9):2509–2547. doi: 10.1007/s11136-013-0362-4.
    1. St-Pierre C, Desmeules F, Dionne CE, Fremont P, MacDermid JC, Roy JS. Psychometric properties of self-reported questionnaires for the evaluation of symptoms and functional limitations in individuals with rotator cuff disorders: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2016;38(2):103–122. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2015.1027004.
    1. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.
    1. Budtz CR, Andersen NB, Qvist I, Pedersen F, Ladegourdie V, Ottosen J, et al. Monitoreringsprojekt fysioterapipraksis 2016: Kan en IT–baseret grundmodel for udredning, behandling og kommunikation implementeres i praksissektoren? [Project on monitoring physiotherapy practice 2016: can standardised electronic data collection tools be implemented ?]. . Accessed 5 Nov 2018.
    1. Kamper SJ, Maher CG, Mackay G. Global rating of change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design. J Man Manip Ther. 2009;17(3):163–170. doi: 10.1179/jmt.2009.17.3.163.
    1. de Vet HC, Ostelo RW, Terwee CB, van der Roer N, Knol DL, Beckerman H, et al. Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach. Qual Life Res. 2007;16(1):131–142. doi: 10.1007/s11136-006-9109-9.
    1. Jorgensen CK, Fink P, Olesen F. Patients in general practice in Denmark referred to physiotherapists: a description of patient characteristics based on general health status, diagnoses, and sociodemographic characteristics. Phys Ther. 2001;81(3):915–923.
    1. de Vos Andersen NB, Kent P, Hjort J, Christiansen DH. Clinical course and prognosis of musculoskeletal pain in patients referred for physiotherapy: does pain site matter? BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017;18(1):130. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1487-3.
    1. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:22. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-10-22.
    1. Mintken PE, Glynn P, Cleland JA. Psychometric properties of the shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire (QuickDASH) and numeric pain rating scale in patients with shoulder pain. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2009;18(6):920–926. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2008.12.015.
    1. Franchignoni F, Vercelli S, Giordano A, Sartorio F, Bravini E, Ferriero G. Minimal clinically important difference of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure (DASH) and its shortened version (QuickDASH) J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014;44(1):30–39. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2014.4893.
    1. Chester R, Jerosch-Herold C, Lewis J, Shepstone L. The SPADI and QuickDASH are similarly responsive in patients undergoing physical therapy for shoulder pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2017;47(8):538–547. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2017.7195.
    1. Polson K, Reid D, McNair PJ, Larmer P. Responsiveness, minimal importance difference and minimal detectable change scores of the shortened disability arm shoulder hand (QuickDASH) questionnaire. Man Ther. 2010;15(4):404–407. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.03.008.
    1. Ostelo RW, Deyo RA, Stratford P, Waddell G, Croft P, Von Korff M, et al. Interpreting change scores for pain and functional status in low back pain: towards international consensus regarding minimal important change. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2008;33(1):90–94. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815e3a10.
    1. Frahm Olsen M, Bjerre E, Hansen MD, Tendal B, Hilden J, Hrobjartsson A. Minimum clinically important differences in chronic pain vary considerably by baseline pain and methodological factors: systematic review of empirical studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;101:87–106.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.05.007.
    1. Danish National Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics. Act on research ethics review of health research projects. 2013; Available at: . Accessed 05/03, 2018.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe