Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background

The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) is one of the most widely used Patient Reported Outcome Measures designed to assess the severity of pain and disability in patients with shoulder conditions.

Objective

The aim of the study is to define the clinically significant outcomes of the Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MCID), Substantial Clinical Benefit (SCB) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the SPADI scores after Rotator Cuff Repair (RCR).

Methods

The present study takes into account patients undergone RCR with a 6-month follow-up. The MCID, PASS and SCB of the SPADI score were evaluated using both distribution and anchor approaches.

Results

Fifty-nine patients (mean aged 60.3 ± 13.1 years) who had undergone RCR in a single surgical center were retrospectively included. The MCID cutoff of the SPADI total score after RCR from the initial evaluation to 6 months post-operatively was 17 (95% CI:13.6,20.4). The outcome measures for the MCID and SCB values of the SPADI pain score were 26 (95% CI:22.3,29.7) and 37 (95% CI:33.4,40.6), respectively. The MCID threshold of the SPADI disability score was 21.9 (95% CI:18.7,25.1). A value of at least 76.9 (95% CI:73.4,80.4), 75 (95% CI:71.6,78.4), and 78.1 (95% CI:74.6,81.6) for SPADI total, pain, and disability dimensions, represented the PASS.

Conclusions

The study shows significant improvements in SPADI scores after RCR, suggesting that could lead to meaningful pain relief and functional recovery. The findings indicate that a post-operative SPADI total score of at least 76.9 correlates with patient satisfaction regarding shoulder health.

Keywords

rotator cuff shoulder pain tendon repair patient reported outcome measure

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Agostini F, de Sire A, Paoloni M, et al. Effects of hyaluronic acid injections on pain and functioning in patients affected by tendinopathies: a narrative review. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 2022; 35: 949–961.

Hodakowski

McCormick

Damodar

, et al.

Rotator cuff repair: what questions are patients asking online and where are they getting their answers?

Clin Shoulder Elb 2023; 26: 25–31.

Paloneva

Lepola

Karppinen

, et al. Declining incidence of acromioplasty in Finland. Acta Orthop 2015; 86: 220–224.

Cederqvist

Flinkkilä

Sormaala

, et al. Non-surgical and surgical treatments for rotator cuff disease: a pragmatic randomised clinical trial with 2-year follow-up after initial rehabilitation. Ann Rheum Dis 2021; 80: 796–802.

Longo

Vasta

Maffulli

, et al. Scoring systems for the functional assessment of patients with rotator cuff pathology. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev 2011; 19: 310–320.

Noonan

Lyddiatt

Ware

, et al. Montreal Accord on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) use series - paper 3: patient-reported outcomes can facilitate shared decision-making and guide self-management. J Clin Epidemiol 2017; 89: 125–135.

Farì G, de Sire A, Fallea C, et al. Efficacy of radiofrequency as therapy and diagnostic support in the management of musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diagnostics 2022; 12: 600.

Breckenridge

McAuley

. Shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI). J Physiother 2011; 57: 197.

Katz

Paillard

Ekman

. Determining the clinical importance of treatment benefits for interventions for painful orthopedic conditions. J Orthop Surg Res 2015; 10: 24.

10.

Nwachukwu

Chang

Rotter

, et al. Minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after revision hip arthroscopy. Arthroscopy 2018; 34: 1862–1868.

11.

Kvien

Heiberg

Hagen

. Minimal clinically important improvement/difference (MCII/MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): what do these concepts mean? Ann Rheum Dis 2007; 66: iii40–iii41.

12.

Somerson

Hsu

Gorbaty

, et al. Classifications in brief: goutallier classification of fatty infiltration of the rotator cuff musculature. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016; 474: 1328–1332.

13.

Lädermann

Burkhart

Hoffmeyer

, et al. Classification of full-thickness rotator cuff lesions: a review. EFORT Open Rev 2016; 1: 420–430.

14.

Longo

King

Denaro

, et al.

Double-bundle arthroscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: does the evidence add up?

J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008; 90-B: 995–999.

15.

Longo

Buchmann

Franceschetti

, et al. A systematic review of single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Br Med Bull 2012; 103: 147–168.

16.

Thoomes-de Graaf

Scholten-Peeters

Duijn

, et al. The Dutch shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI): a reliability and validation study. Qual Life Res 2015; 24: 1515–1519.

17.

Copay

Subach

Glassman

, et al. Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J 2007; 7: 541–546.

18.

Yin

Tian

. Joint confidence region estimation for area under ROC curve and Youden index. Stat Med 2014; 33: 985–1000.

19.

Hanley

. The robustness of the “binormal” assumptions used in fitting ROC curves. Med Decis Making 1988; 8: 197–203.

20.

Sorensen

Howard

Tan

, et al. Minimal clinically important differences of 3 patient-rated outcomes instruments. J Hand Surg Am 2013; 38: 641–649.

21.

Polacek

Nyegaard

. Superior capsular reconstruction using 3-layered fascia lata autograft reinforced with a nonresorbable suture mesh. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil 2020; 2: e489–e497.

22.

Kim

Kholinne

, et al. Minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 2020; 48: 2650–2659.

23.

Haunschild

Gilat

, et al. Establishing the minimal clinically important difference, patient acceptable symptomatic state, and substantial clinical benefit of the PROMIS upper extremity questionnaire after rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 2020; 48: 3439–3446.

24.

Cvetanovich

Gowd

Liu

, et al. Establishing clinically significant outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2019; 28: 939–948.

25.

Roy

MacDermid

Woodhouse

. Measuring shoulder function: a systematic review of four questionnaires. Arthritis Rheum 2009; 61: 623–632.

26.

Tran

Dube

Kingsbury

, et al. Investigating the patient acceptable symptom state cut-offs: longitudinal data from a community cohort using the shoulder pain and disability index. Rheumatol Int 2020; 40: 599–605.

27.

Bot

Terwee

van der Windt

, et al. Clinimetric evaluation of shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63: 335–341.

28.

Stipancic

Yunusova

Berry

, et al. Minimally detectable change and minimal clinically important difference of a decline in sentence intelligibility and speaking rate for individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2018; 61: 2757–2771.

29.

Çelik

Çoban

Kılıçoğlu

. Minimal clinically important difference of commonly used hip-, knee-, foot-, and ankle-specific questionnaires: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2019; 113: 44–57.

30.

MacKay

Clements

Wong

, et al. A systematic review of estimates of the minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptom state of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index in patients who underwent total hip and total knee replacement. Osteoarthr Cartilage 2019; 27: 1408–1419.

31.

Maredupaka

Meshram

Chatte

, et al. Minimal clinically important difference of commonly used patient-reported outcome measures in total knee arthroplasty: review of terminologies, methods and proposed values. Knee Surg Relat Res 2020; 32: 19.

Evaluating shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) outcomes post-rotator cuff repair: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID),patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) analysis

Abstract

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References