Browsing by Subject "Disability evaluation"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Effect of Delirium on Physical Function in Noncardiac Thoracic Surgery Patients
    (American Association of Critical-Care Nurses, 2020-03) Khan, Sikandar H.; Xu, Chenjia; Wang, Sophia; Gao, Sujuan; Lasiter, Sue; Kesler, Kenneth; Khan, Babar A.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: The effect of delirium on physical function in patients undergoing noncardiac thoracic surgery has not been well described and may differ from that in other surgical populations. Objective: To determine the effects of delirium on muscle strength and functional independence. The primary end point was change in Medical Research Council sum score (MRC-SS) by delirium status. Methods: A secondary analysis of data from a clinical trial involving English-speaking adults aged 18 years or older who were undergoing major noncardiac thoracic surgery. Exclusion criteria were history of schizophrenia, Parkinson disease, dementia, alcohol abuse, or neuroleptic malignant syndrome; haloperidol allergy; being pregnant or nursing; QT prolongation; and taking levodopa or cholinesterase inhibitors. Delirium was assessed twice daily using the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit. Preoperatively and postoperatively, muscle strength was assessed using the modified MRC-SS and functional independence was assessed using the Katz scale of activities of daily living. Changes in MRC-SS and Katz score by delirium status were analyzed using the Fisher exact test. Results: Seventy-three patients were included in the analysis. Median (interquartile range) MRC-SS and Katz score before surgery did not differ significantly between patients without and with delirium (MRC-SS: 30 [30-30] vs 30 [30-30], P > .99; Katz score: 6 [6-6] vs 6 [6-6], P = .63). The percentage of patients with a change in MRC-SS was similar in patients without and with delirium (17% vs 13%, respectively; P > .99). More patients in the delirium group had a change in Katz score (13% vs 0%, P = .04). Conclusions: Postoperative delirium was not associated with change in muscle strength. Follow-up studies using other muscle measures may be needed.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Estimating minimally important differences for the PROMIS pain interference scales: results from 3 randomized clinical trials
    (Wolters Kluwer, 2018-04) Chen, Chen X.; Kroenke, Kurt; Stump, Timothy E.; Kean, Jacob; Carpenter, Janet S.; Krebs, Erin E.; Bair, Matthew J.; Damush, Teresa M.; Monahan, Patrick O.; School of Nursing
    Minimally important difference (MID) refers to the smallest meaningful difference that carries implications for patient care. Minimally important differences are necessary to help interpret patient-reported pain outcomes in research and clinical practice. The PROMIS pain interference scales were validated across diverse samples; however, more information about their MIDs could improve their interpretability. The purpose of this study was to estimate MIDs for 4 fixed-length PROMIS pain interference scales, including the 6-item Pain Short Form and the 4-, 6-, and 8-item pain interference scales used in the PROMIS profile instruments. Data were analyzed from 3 randomized controlled trials (N = 759). The 3 samples, respectively, consisted of patients with chronic low back pain (n = 261), chronic back pain or hip/knee osteoarthritis pain (n = 240), and a history of stroke (n = 258). For each sample, anchor- and distribution-based approaches were used to estimate MIDs. Standard error of measurement and effect sizes were used as distribution-based MID estimates. Anchor-based MID estimates were established by mapping PROMIS pain interference scores onto established anchor measures, including the Brief Pain Inventory, and retrospective and prospective global ratings of change. The distribution- and anchor-based MID estimates showed convergence. For the pain samples, MID estimates ranged from 2 to 3 T-score points. For the nonpain sample, MID estimates ranged from 3.5 to 4.5 T-score points. The MID estimates were comparable across the 4 fixed-length scales. These MIDs can be used to evaluate treatment effects in research and clinical care and to calculate estimates for powering clinical trials.