ArticleJournal of pain research2025
The Minimum Clinically Important Difference of the Brief Pain Inventory During the Perioperative Period of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Observational Study.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To define the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) during the perioperative period of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA). Methods: A total of 394 UKA patients were recruited from January 2022 to October 2024, following the inclusion and exclusion criteria. During hospitalization, each patient completed the Likert scale and BPI scale to record pain and functional changes pre- and postoperatively during the perioperative period. Based on the Likert scale responses, patients were divided into the "Improvement Group" and "Non-Improvement Group". The MCID of the BPI scale in UKA patients during the perioperative period was analyzed and calculated using three methods: the anchor-based method, the distribution-based method, and ROC curve analysis. The ROC curve method determined the cut-off value for MCID based on the area under the curve (AUC) and the optimal Youden index. Results: Based on the Likert scale responses, 154 patients were classified into the "Improvement Group" and 79 patients into the "Non-Improvement Group". The MCID values of the BPI scale calculated by the three methods were as follows: for BPI-PI, the MCID values were 1.66 (anchor-based method), 1.02 (distribution-based method), and 1.63 (ROC curve analysis, AUC = 0.907, P < 0.001); for BPI-GII, the MCID values were 2.02 (anchor-based method), 1.04 (distribution-based method), and 1.90 (ROC curve analysis, AUC = 0.934, P < 0.001). Conclusion: Given the potential discrepancies in MCID values calculated by different methods, the values derived from the anchor-based method and ROC curve analysis were closer to each other and demonstrated higher reliability compared to those obtained using the distribution-based method. Furthermore, this study provides valuable reference data for assessing perioperative pain in UKA patients, which can assist in optimizing pain management strategies and improving postoperative recovery experiences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.