Verification of the minimal clinically important difference of the Capabilities of Upper Extremity Test in patients with subacute spinal cord injury

Abstract

Context

The number of patients with cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) is increasing, and the Capabilities of Upper Extremity Test (CUE-T) is recommended for introduction in clinical trials. We calculated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the CUE-T using an adjustment model with an interval of 1 month.

Design

This was a prospective study.

Setting

This study was conducted with participants from the Chiba Rehabilitation Center in Japan.

Participants

The participants were patients with subacute CSCI.

Interventions

The CUE-T and spinal cord independence measure (SCIM) III were performed twice within an interval of 1 month.

Outcome Measures

The MCID was calculated using an adjustment model based on logistic regression analysis. The participants were classified into an improvement group and a non-improvement group based on the amount of change in the two evaluations using the 10-point SCIM III MCID as an anchor.

Results

There were 52 participants (56.8 ± 13.5 years old, 45 men/7 women) with complete or incomplete CSCI: 18 in the improvement group and 34 in the non-improvement group. A significant regression equation was obtained when calculating the MCID, and the total, hand, and side scores were 7.7, 2.0, and 3.7 points, respectively.

Conclusion

The calculated MCID of the CUE-T in this study was 7.7 points. The results of this study provide useful criteria for implementation in clinical trials. Future studies should use patient-reported outcomes, a more recommended anchor, and calculate the MCID using methods such as the patient’s condition.

Keywords:

• Minimal clinically important difference
• Outcome measure
• Rehabilitation
• Spinal cord injuries
• Upper limb function

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the staffs of the Chiba Rehabilitation Center for their cooperation in data collection and other activities. And, we would like to thank Editage (www.editage.com) for English language editing.

Disclaimer statements

Contributors None.

Funding None.

Conflicts of interest Authors have no conflict of interests to declare.