• 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
    • Technology
    • 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
    • SUO Corner
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events

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

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

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.

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.

ENTtoday - https://www.enttoday.org/article/vestibular-schwannoma-quality-life-assessment-shows-minimal-clinically-signicant-difference/

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