-
- Mark P Jensen, Thomas J Schnitzer, Hongwei Wang, Steven S Smugar, Paul M Peloso, and Arnold Gammaitoni.
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98104, USA. mjensen@uw.edu
- Clin J Pain. 2012 Jan 1;28(1):1-7.
ObjectivesA composite responder index for chronic low-back pain (CLBP) has recently been proposed to evaluate the efficacy of CLBP treatments in clinical trials. We compared the responsiveness of this composite measure with a number of single-item responder definitions.MethodsWe pooled data from 2 placebo-controlled studies of etoricoxib in CLBP to evaluate 5 response criteria: 30% pain intensity (PI) reduction; 50% PI reduction; 20 mm absolute reduction (100 mm PI visual analog scale); patient global assessment of response to therapy (PGART); and the composite criteria of 30% reduction in PI+30% improvement in PGART of disease status+no worsening in function. We used bootstrap analysis and logistic regression to assess the ability to differentiate etoricoxib and placebo, and the κ coefficient to assess agreement among the responder criteria.ResultsThe criterion of a 20 mm improvement in PI resulted in the greatest proportion (71.5%) of patients being classified as responders and all criteria separated etoricoxib from placebo (P≤0.0001). PGART had the highest discriminant ability (odds ratio 5.90), and was significantly (P<0.05) more discriminant than the 20 mm and ≥30% improvements and the composite criteria. After adjusting for all other measures, only PGART continued to show a significant treatment effect for etoricoxib versus placebo (P=0.0003). Kappa values contrasting the composite criteria and the single-item measures ranged from 0.59 to 0.85.DiscussionThese findings do not support the superiority of a composite index over single-item ratings of PI and PGART ratings, but do suggest that PGART ratings may be more responsive to treatment, perhaps because they measure something in addition to change in PI.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.