1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Minimal clinically important difference for grip strength: a systematic review

      review-article
      , PT, DPT, EdD 1
      Journal of Physical Therapy Science
      The Society of Physical Therapy Science
      Hand, Muscle strength, Dynamometry

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          [Purpose] The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in grip strength is critical to interpreting changes in hand strength over time. This review was undertaken to summarize extant descriptions of the MCID for grip strength. [Methods] A search of 3 bibliographic databases as well as a hand search were completed to identify articles reporting the MCID for grip forces obtained by dynamometry. [Results] Of 38 unique articles identified as potentially relevant, 4 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of this review. The MCIDs ranged from 0.04 kg to 6.5 kg. However, only a single study used receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and had an associated area under the curve exceeding 0.70. That study reported an MCID of 6.5 kg, which was similar to the MCIDs of another included study and minimal detectable changes reported elsewhere. [Conclusion] Additional, more rigorous, studies are needed to identify MCIDs for grip strength. In the meantime changes of 5.0 to 6.5 kg may be reasonable estimates of meaningful changes in grip strength.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference.

          In recent years quality of life instruments have been featured as primary outcomes in many randomized trials. One of the challenges facing the investigator using such measures is determining the significance of any differences observed, and communicating that significance to clinicians who will be applying the trial results. We have developed an approach to elucidating the significance of changes in score in quality of life instruments by comparing them to global ratings of change. Using this approach we have established a plausible range within which the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) falls. In three studies in which instruments measuring dyspnea, fatigue, and emotional function in patients with chronic heart and lung disease were applied the MCID was represented by mean change in score of approximately 0.5 per item, when responses were presented on a seven point Likert scale. Furthermore, we have established ranges for changes in questionnaire scores that correspond to moderate and large changes in the domains of interest. This information will be useful in interpreting questionnaire scores, both in individuals and in groups of patients participating in controlled trials, and in the planning of new trials.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Global variation in grip strength: a systematic review and meta-analysis of normative data

            Background: weak grip strength is a key component of sarcopenia and is associated with subsequent disability and mortality. We have recently established life course normative data for grip strength in Great Britain, but it is unclear whether the cut points we derived for weak grip strength are suitable for use in other settings. Our objective was to investigate differences in grip strength by world region using our data as a reference standard. Methods: we searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for reporting age- and gender-stratified normative data for grip strength. We extracted each item of normative data and converted it on to a Z-score scale relative to our British centiles. We performed meta-regression to pool the Z-scores and compare them by world region. Findings: our search returned 806 abstracts. Sixty papers met inclusion criteria and reported on 63 different samples. Seven UN regions were represented, although most samples (n = 44) were based in developed regions. We extracted 726 normative data items relating to 96,537 grip strength observations. Normative data from developed regions were broadly similar to our British centiles, with a pooled Z-score 0.12 SDs (95% CI: 0.07, 0.17) above the corresponding British centiles. By comparison, normative data from developing regions were clearly lower, with a pooled Z-score of −0.85 SDs (95% CI: −0.94, −0.76). Interpretation: our findings support the use of our British grip strength centiles and their associated cut points in consensus definitions for sarcopenia and frailty across developed regions, but highlight the need for different cut points in developing regions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Estimating minimal clinically important differences of upper-extremity measures early after stroke.

              To estimate minimal clinically important difference (MCID) values of several upper-extremity measures early after stroke. Data in this report were collected during the Very Early Constraint-induced Therapy for Recovery of Stroke trial, an acute, single-blind randomized controlled trial of constraint-induced movement therapy. Subjects were tested at the prerandomization baseline assessment (average days poststroke, 9.5d) and the first posttreatment assessment (average days poststroke, 25.9d). At each time point, the affected upper extremity was evaluated with a battery of 6 tests. At the second assessment, subjects were also asked to provide a global rating of perceived changes in their affected upper extremity. Anchor-based MCID values were calculated separately for the affected dominant upper extremities and the affected nondominant upper extremities for each of the 6 tests. Inpatient rehabilitation hospital. Fifty-two people with hemiparesis poststroke. Not applicable. Estimated MCID values for grip strength, composite upper-extremity strength, Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), Motor Activity Log (MAL), and duration of upper-extremity use as measured with accelerometry. MCID values for grip strength were 5.0 and 6.2 kg for the affected dominant and nondominant sides, respectively. MCID values for the ARAT were 12 and 17 points, for the WMFT function score were 1.0 and 1.2 points, and for the MAL quality of movement score were 1.0 and 1.1 points for the 2 sides, respectively. MCID values were indeterminate for the dominant (composite strength), the nondominant (WMFT time score), and both affected sides (duration of use) for the other measures. Our data provide some of the first estimates of MCID values for upper-extremity standardized measures early after stroke. Future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to refine these estimates and to determine whether MCID values are modified by time poststroke.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Phys Ther Sci
                J Phys Ther Sci
                JPTS
                Journal of Physical Therapy Science
                The Society of Physical Therapy Science
                0915-5287
                2187-5626
                10 January 2019
                January 2019
                : 31
                : 1
                : 75-78
                Affiliations
                [1) ] Department of Physical Therapy, Campbell University: 4150 US Highway 421 South, Lillington, North Carolina, 27546 USA
                Author notes
                Corresponding author. Richard W Bohannon (E-mail: bohannon@ 123456campbell.edu )
                Article
                jpts-2018-339
                10.1589/jpts.31.75
                6348186
                30774209
                ebd70bb2-d604-4bd7-ad88-c63af546c11e
                2019©by the Society of Physical Therapy Science. Published by IPEC Inc.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives (by-nc-nd) License. (CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ )

                History
                : 29 August 2018
                : 07 October 2018
                Categories
                Review Article

                hand,muscle strength,dynamometry
                hand, muscle strength, dynamometry

                Comments

                Comment on this article