• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Vestibular Schwannoma Quality-of-Life Assessment Shows Minimal Clinically Signicant Difference

by George T. Hashisaki, MD • July 10, 2016

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

What is the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in quality-of-life measures among different treatment modalities for patients with vestibular schwannoma?

Background: For patients with a vestibular schwannoma, there are different treatment or management options, including assessment with serial MRI scans, microsurgery, or radiosurgery. Studies using quality-of-life measures have attempted to compare outcomes among these treatment modalities.

You Might Also Like

  • Vestibular Schwannoma Quality-of-Life Assessment Shows Minimal Clinically Significant Difference
  • Understanding the Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes
  • Aspirin Shows No Association with Vestibular Schwannoma Growth
  • Vestibular Loss in Older Patients Significantly Decreases Quality of Life
Explore This Issue
July 2016

Study design: Cross-sectional retrospective survey.

Setting: Two academic referral centers.

Synopsis: A total of 538 patients with vestibular schwannomas who had been evaluated and/or treated at either of two academic referral centers responded to a retrospective survey. Quality-of-life surveys included the PANQOL (Penn Acoustic Neuroma Quality Of Life) and SF-36 (Short Form Health Survey). Two methods, anchor-based and distribution-based, were used to determine the MCID for the two surveys. The recommended MCID for the PANQOL was 11. The recommended MCID for the SF-36 was seven for the mental component and eight for the physical component.

Bottom line: The MCID can be a useful tool to evaluate and compare group outcomes, and determining MCID values for the PANQOL and SF-36 surveys will allow better comparisons between studies of treatment outcomes for patients with vestibular schwannoma.

Citation: Carlson ML, Tveiten ØV, Yost KJ, Lohse CM, Lund-Johansen M, Link MJ. The minimal clinically significant difference in vestibular schwannoma quality-of-life assessment: an important step beyond P<.05. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;153:202-208.

Filed Under: Literature Reviews, Otology/Neurotology, Otology/Neurotology, Practice Focus Tagged With: MCID, quality of life, vestibular schwannomaIssue: July 2016

You Might Also Like:

  • Vestibular Schwannoma Quality-of-Life Assessment Shows Minimal Clinically Significant Difference
  • Understanding the Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes
  • Aspirin Shows No Association with Vestibular Schwannoma Growth
  • Vestibular Loss in Older Patients Significantly Decreases Quality of Life

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • A Journey Through Pay Inequity: A Physician’s Firsthand Account

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939