The minimal important difference of exercise tests in severe COPD

被引:304
|
作者
Puhan, M. A. [1 ,7 ,8 ]
Chandra, D. [3 ]
Mosenifar, Z. [4 ]
Ries, A. [5 ]
Make, B. [6 ]
Hansel, N. N. [2 ]
Wise, R. A. [2 ]
Sciurba, F. [3 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Univ, Div Pulm & Crit Care Med, Baltimore, MD USA
[3] Univ Pittsburgh, Div Pulm Allergy & Crit Care Med, Pittsburgh, PA USA
[4] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Cedars Sinai Med Ctr, Div Pulm & Crit Care Med, Los Angeles, CA 90048 USA
[5] Univ Calif San Diego, Div Pulm & Crit Care Med, San Diego, CA 92103 USA
[6] Univ Colorado, Div Pulm Sci & Crit Care Med, Denver, CO 80202 USA
[7] Univ Zurich, Horten Ctr, Zurich, Switzerland
[8] McMaster Univ, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON, Canada
基金
美国医疗保健研究与质量局;
关键词
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment; clinical trials; exercise tests; rehabilitation; OBSTRUCTIVE PULMONARY-DISEASE; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; GEORGES-RESPIRATORY-QUESTIONNAIRE; CHRONIC LUNG-DISEASE; WALK DISTANCE; DYSPNEA;
D O I
10.1183/09031936.00063810
中图分类号
R56 [呼吸系及胸部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Our aim was to determine the minimal important difference (MID) for 6-min walk distance (6MWD) and maximal cycle exercise capacity (MCEC) in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). 1,218 patients enrolled in the National Emphysema Treatment Trial completed exercise tests before and after 4-6 weeks of pre-trial rehabilitation, and 6 months after randomisation to surgery or medical care. The St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (domain and total scores) and University of California San Diego Shortness of Breath Questionnaire (total score) served as anchors for anchor-based MID estimates. In order to calculate distribution-based estimates, we used the standard error of measurement, Cohen's effect size and the empirical rule effect size. Anchor-based estimates for the 6MWD were 18.9 m (95% CI 18.1-20.1 m), 24.2 m (95% CI 23.4-25.4 m), 24.6 m (95% CI 23.4-25.7 m) and 26.4 m (95% CI 25.4-27.4 m), which were similar to distribution-based MID estimates of 25.7, 26.8 and 30.6 m. For MCEC, anchor-based estimates for the MID were 2.2 W (95% CI 2.0-2.4 W), 3.2 W (95% CI 3.0-3.4 W), 3.2 W (95% CI 3.0-3.4 W) and 3.3 W (95% CI 3.0-3.5 W), while distribution-based estimates were 5.3 and 5.5 W. We suggest a MID of 26 +/- 2 m for 6MWD and 4 +/- 1 W for MCEC for patients with severe COPD.
引用
收藏
页码:784 / 790
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Minimal important difference in field walking tests in non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis following exercise training
    Lee, A. L.
    Hill, C. J.
    Cecins, N.
    Jenkins, S.
    McDonald, C. F.
    Burge, A. T.
    Rautela, L.
    Stirling, R. G.
    Thompson, P. J.
    Holland, A. E.
    RESPIRATORY MEDICINE, 2014, 108 (09) : 1303 - 1309
  • [22] MINIMAL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE FOR PEDOMETER STEP COUNT IN COPD: A PROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS
    Polgar, O.
    Patel, S.
    Walsh, J. A.
    Barker, R. E.
    Clarke, S. F.
    Man, WD-C
    Nolan, C. M.
    THORAX, 2021, 76 : A217 - A218
  • [23] The Clinical COPD Questionnaire: response to pulmonary rehabilitation and minimal clinically important difference
    Kon, Samantha S. C.
    Dilaver, Deniz
    Mittal, Manvi
    Nolan, Claire M.
    Clark, Amy L.
    Canavan, Jane L.
    Jones, Sarah E.
    Polkey, Michael I.
    Man, William D-C
    THORAX, 2014, 69 (09) : 793 - 798
  • [24] Do We Know the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for COPD Exacerbations?
    Chapman, Kenneth R.
    Bergeron, Celine
    Bhutani, Mohit
    Bourbeau, Jean
    Grossman, Ronald F.
    Hernandez, Paul
    McIvor, R. Andrew
    Mayers, Irvin
    COPD-JOURNAL OF CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE PULMONARY DISEASE, 2013, 10 (02) : 243 - 249
  • [25] Responsiveness of the COPD Assessment Test The Minimal Clinically Important Difference Does Matter
    Kocks, Janwillem W. H.
    Tsiligianni, Ioanna G.
    van der Molen, Thys
    CHEST, 2012, 142 (01) : 267 - 268
  • [26] The Severe Asthma Questionnaire: sensitivity to change and minimal clinically important difference
    Masoli, Matthew
    Lanario, Joseph W.
    Hyland, Michael E.
    Menzies-Gow, Andrew
    Mansur, Adel H.
    Allen, David
    Dodd, James W.
    Hayes, Gemma
    Valderas, Jose M.
    Lamb, Sarah E.
    Jones, Rupert C.
    EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 2021, 57 (06)
  • [27] Minimal clinically important difference and predictive validity of the mMRC and mBorg in acute exacerbations of COPD
    Oliveira, Ana Luisa Araujo
    Andrade, Lilia
    Marques, Alda
    EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 2017, 50
  • [28] The impact of patient characteristics on the Minimal Clinically Important Difference of COPD health status tools
    Alma, Harma
    De Jong, Corina
    Jelusic, Danijel
    Wittmann, Michael
    Schuler, Michael
    Sanderman, Robbert
    Schultz, Konrad
    Kocks, Janwillem
    Van der Molen, Thys
    EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 2018, 52
  • [29] The 4-metre gait speed in COPD: responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference
    Kon, Samantha S. C.
    Canavan, Jane L.
    Nolan, Claire M.
    Clark, Amy L.
    Jones, Sarah E.
    Cullinan, Paul
    Polkey, Michael I.
    Man, William D-C.
    EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 2014, 43 (05) : 1298 - 1305
  • [30] MINIMAL IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE OF TWO METHODS FOR ASSESSMENT OF QUADRICEPS FEMORIS STRENGTH IN INDIVIDUALS WITH COPD
    Santin, Lais
    Fonseca, Jessica
    Hirata, Raquel
    Hernandes, Nidia Aparecida
    Pitta, Fabio
    EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 2021, 58