We have located links that may give you full text access.
Reliability and minimal clinically important differences of forced vital capacity: Results from the Scleroderma Lung Studies (SLS-I and SLS-II).
OBJECTIVES: To assess the reliability and the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) for FVC% predicted in the Scleroderma Lung Study I and II.
METHODS: Using data from SLS I and II (N=300), we evaluated the test-retest reliability for FVC% predicted (FVC%; screening vs. baseline) using intra-class correlation (ICC). MCID estimates at 12 months were calculated in the pooled cohort (SLS-I and II) using 2 anchors: Transition Dyspnea Index (≥change of 1.5 units for improvement and worsening, respectively) and the SF-36 Health Transition question: "Compared to one year ago, how would you rate your health in general now?", where "somewhat better" or "somewhat worse" were defined as the MCID estimates. We next assessed the association of MCID estimates for improvement and worsening of FVC% with patient reported outcomes (PROs) and computer-assisted quantitation of extent of fibrosis (QLF) and of total ILD (QILD) on HRCT.
RESULTS: Reliability of FVC%, assessed at a mean of 34 days, was 0.93 for the pooled cohort. The MCID estimates for the pooled cohort at 12 months for FVC% improvement ranged from 3.0 % to 5.3% and for worsening from -3.0% to -3.3%. FVC% improvement by ≥MCID was associated with either statistically significant or numerical improvements in some PROs, QILD, and QLF, while FVC% worsening ≥MCID was associated with statistically significant or numerical worsening of PROs, QILD, and QLF.
CONCLUSION: FVC% has acceptable test-retest reliability, and we have provided the MCID estimates for FVC% in SSc-ILD based changes at 12 months from baseline in two clinical trials. Clinical trial registration available at www.clinicaltrials.gov, IDs NCT00004563 and NCT00883129.
METHODS: Using data from SLS I and II (N=300), we evaluated the test-retest reliability for FVC% predicted (FVC%; screening vs. baseline) using intra-class correlation (ICC). MCID estimates at 12 months were calculated in the pooled cohort (SLS-I and II) using 2 anchors: Transition Dyspnea Index (≥change of 1.5 units for improvement and worsening, respectively) and the SF-36 Health Transition question: "Compared to one year ago, how would you rate your health in general now?", where "somewhat better" or "somewhat worse" were defined as the MCID estimates. We next assessed the association of MCID estimates for improvement and worsening of FVC% with patient reported outcomes (PROs) and computer-assisted quantitation of extent of fibrosis (QLF) and of total ILD (QILD) on HRCT.
RESULTS: Reliability of FVC%, assessed at a mean of 34 days, was 0.93 for the pooled cohort. The MCID estimates for the pooled cohort at 12 months for FVC% improvement ranged from 3.0 % to 5.3% and for worsening from -3.0% to -3.3%. FVC% improvement by ≥MCID was associated with either statistically significant or numerical improvements in some PROs, QILD, and QLF, while FVC% worsening ≥MCID was associated with statistically significant or numerical worsening of PROs, QILD, and QLF.
CONCLUSION: FVC% has acceptable test-retest reliability, and we have provided the MCID estimates for FVC% in SSc-ILD based changes at 12 months from baseline in two clinical trials. Clinical trial registration available at www.clinicaltrials.gov, IDs NCT00004563 and NCT00883129.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Acute and non-acute decompensation of liver cirrhosis (47/130).Liver International : Official Journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver 2024 March 2
Guide to Utilization of the Microbiology Laboratory for Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases: 2024 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the American Society for Microbiology (ASM).Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024 March 6
Status epilepticus: what's new for the intensivist.Current Opinion in Critical Care 2024 Februrary 15
Administration of methylene blue in septic shock: pros and cons.Critical Care : the Official Journal of the Critical Care Forum 2024 Februrary 17
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app