Linking the Tinnitus Questionnaire and the subjective Clinical Global Impression: Which differences are clinically important?

BackgroundDevelopment of new tinnitus treatments requires prospective placebo-controlled randomized trials to prove their efficacy. The Tinnitus Questionnaire (TQ) is a validated and commonly used instrument for assessment of tinnitus severity and has been used in many clinical studies. Defining the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for TQ changes is an important step to a better interpretation of the clinical relevance of changes observed in clinical trials. In this study we aimed to estimate the minimum change of the TQ score that could be considered clinically relevant.Methods757 patients with chronic tinnitus were pooled from the TRI database and the RESET study. An anchor-based approach using the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale and distributional approaches were used to estimate MCID. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated to define optimal TQ change cutoffs discriminating between minimally changed and unchanged subjects.ResultsThe relationship between TQ change scores and CGI ratings of change was good (r = 0.52, p < 0.05). Mean change scores associated with minimally better and minimally worse CGI categories were −6.65 and +2.72 respectively. According to the ROC method MCID for improvement was −5 points and for deterioration +1 points.ConclusionDistribution and anchor-based methods yielded comparable results in identifying MCIDs. ΔTQ scores of −5 and +1 points were identified as the minimal clinically relevant change for improvement and worsening respectively. The asymmetry of the MCIDs for improvement and worsening may be related to expectation effects.

[1]  P. Stratford,et al.  Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 2. , 1998, Physical therapy.

[2]  Winfried Schlee,et al.  Abnormal resting-state cortical coupling in chronic tinnitus , 2009, BMC Neuroscience.

[3]  A. Nordwall,et al.  The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain , 2003, European Spine Journal.

[4]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[5]  G. Regehr,et al.  Methodological problems in the retrospective computation of responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach. , 1997, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[6]  B. Langguth,et al.  Which tinnitus patients benefit from transcranial magnetic stimulation? , 2007, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[7]  B. Langguth,et al.  Tinnitus and depression , 2011, The world journal of biological psychiatry : the official journal of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry.

[8]  D. Eton,et al.  Combining Distribution- and Anchor-Based Approaches to Determine Minimally Important Differences , 2005, Evaluation & the health professions.

[9]  D. Cella,et al.  Combining anchor and distribution-based methods to derive minimal clinically important differences on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) anemia and fatigue scales. , 2002, Journal of pain and symptom management.

[10]  W M Tierney,et al.  Linking clinical relevance and statistical significance in evaluating intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. , 1999, Medical care.

[11]  Ariana M. Kelly The minimum clinically significant difference in visual analogue scale pain score does not differ with severity of pain , 2001, Emergency medicine journal : EMJ.

[12]  G H Guyatt,et al.  Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 1. , 1998, Physical therapy.

[13]  Richard S. Hallam,et al.  Cognitive variables in tinnitus annoyance. , 1988, The British journal of clinical psychology.

[14]  N. Jacobson,et al.  Methods for defining and determining the clinical significance of treatment effects: description, application, and alternatives. , 1999, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[15]  Christian Hauptmann,et al.  Psychometric evaluation of visual analog scale for the assessment of chronic tinnitus. , 2012, American journal of audiology.

[16]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Practical statistics for medical research , 1990 .

[17]  M. Koller,et al.  Tinnitus Handicap Inventory for Evaluating Treatment Effects , 2011, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[18]  D. Cella,et al.  Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores: Differences between improvement and worsening , 2002, Quality of Life Research.

[19]  J P Rauschecker,et al.  Consensus for tinnitus patient assessment and treatment outcome measurement: Tinnitus Research Initiative meeting, Regensburg, July 2006. , 2007, Progress in Brain Research.

[20]  C. McHorney,et al.  Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? , 1995, Quality of Life Research.

[21]  W. Noble Self-assessment of hearing and related functions , 1998 .

[22]  Berthold Langguth,et al.  The Tinnitus Research Initiative (TRI) database: A new approach for delineation of tinnitus subtypes and generation of predictors for treatment outcome , 2010, BMC Medical Informatics Decis. Mak..

[23]  N. Jacobson,et al.  Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. , 1991, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[24]  Tom Fawcett,et al.  An introduction to ROC analysis , 2006, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[25]  D. Hall,et al.  Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials examining tinnitus management , 2011, The Laryngoscope.

[26]  S. Targum,et al.  The clinical global impressions scale: applying a research tool in clinical practice. , 2007, Psychiatry (Edgmont (Pa. : Township)).

[27]  P. Jastreboff,et al.  A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neramexane in patients with moderate to severe subjective tinnitus , 2011, BMC ear, nose, and throat disorders.

[28]  B. Langguth,et al.  Reduction of Tinnitus Severity by the Centrally Acting Muscle Relaxant Cyclobenzaprine: An Open-Label Pilot Study , 2012, Audiology and Neurotology.

[29]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. , 1989, Controlled clinical trials.

[30]  The tinnitus intensive therapy habituation program: a 2-year follow-up pilot study on subjective tinnitus. , 2009, Rehabilitation psychology.

[31]  B. Langguth,et al.  Treatment of chronic tinnitus with repeated sessions of prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation: outcomes from an open-label pilot study , 2012, Journal of Neurology.

[32]  Jesse A. Berlin,et al.  Defining the clinically important difference in pain outcome measures , 2000, PAIN.

[33]  Ross D Crosby,et al.  Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. , 2003, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[34]  F K Kuk,et al.  The psychometric properties of a tinnitus handicap questionnaire. , 1990, Ear and hearing.

[35]  J. Steiner,et al.  Health and Quality of Life Outcomes , 2006 .

[36]  Eugen Diesch,et al.  Auditory Discrimination Training for the Treatment of Tinnitus , 2004, Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback.

[37]  R. Hays,et al.  Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. , 2008, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[38]  D. Redelmeier,et al.  Assessing the clinical importance of symptomatic improvements. An illustration in rheumatology. , 1993, Archives of internal medicine.

[39]  S Sunaert,et al.  Electrical stimulation of auditory and somatosensory cortices for treatment of tinnitus and pain. , 2007, Progress in brain research.

[40]  J. Farrar,et al.  Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale , 2001, PAIN.

[41]  R. Hauser,et al.  Determination of minimal clinically important change in early and advanced Parkinson's disease , 2011, Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society.

[42]  M. King A point of minimal important difference (MID): a critique of terminology and methods , 2011, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[43]  R. Hays,et al.  Commentary on using the SF-36 or MOS-HIV in studies of persons with HIV disease , 2003, Health and quality of life outcomes.

[44]  P. Jastreboff,et al.  Tinnitus Retraining Therapy , 2011 .

[45]  P. Wilson,et al.  Tinnitus reaction questionnaire: psychometric properties of a measure of distress associated with tinnitus. , 1991, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[46]  Jos J Eggermont,et al.  Central tinnitus. , 2003, Auris, nasus, larynx.

[47]  J. Pope,et al.  The Minimally Important Difference for Patient-reported Outcomes in Spondyloarthropathies including Pain, Fatigue, Sleep, and Health Assessment Questionnaire , 2010, The Journal of Rheumatology.

[48]  D. Beaton,et al.  Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. , 2002, Current opinion in rheumatology.

[49]  G. Norman,et al.  Interpretation of Changes in Health-related Quality of Life: The Remarkable Universality of Half a Standard Deviation , 2003, Medical care.

[50]  J. J. Eggermont,et al.  Changes in spontaneous neural activity immediately after an acoustic trauma: implications for neural correlates of tinnitus , 2003, Hearing Research.

[51]  P. Tugwell,et al.  Minimum important difference between patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the patient's perspective. , 1993, The Journal of rheumatology.

[52]  T. Elbert,et al.  Neurofeedback for treating tinnitus. , 2007, Progress in brain research.

[53]  Thomas Elbert,et al.  Tinnitus Perception and Distress Is Related to Abnormal Spontaneous Brain Activity as Measured by Magnetoencephalography , 2005, PLoS medicine.

[54]  M. Koller,et al.  Design of a placebo-controlled , randomized study of the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of chronic tinntius , 2008 .

[55]  Christian Hauptmann,et al.  Counteracting tinnitus by acoustic coordinated reset neuromodulation. , 2012, Restorative neurology and neuroscience.

[56]  M. Congedo,et al.  Tinnitus Intensity Dependent Gamma Oscillations of the Contralateral Auditory Cortex , 2009, PloS one.

[57]  G. Goebel,et al.  15-year prospective follow-up study of behavioral therapy in a large sample of inpatients with chronic tinnitus , 2006, Acta oto-laryngologica. Supplementum.