What is the Minimum Clinically Important Difference in Grip Strength?

BackgroundGrip strength reflects functional status of the upper extremity and has been used in many of the clinical studies regarding upper extremity disease or fracture. However, the smallest difference in grip strength that a patient would notice as an improvement resulting from treatment (defined as the minimum clinically important difference [MCID]), to our knowledge has not been determined.Questions/purposesWe asked (1) how 1-year postsurgery grip strength compares with preinjury values; (2) if grip strength correlated with patient’s ratings; (3) what the MCID is in the grip strength; and (4) if these values are equivalent to or greater than what can be explained by measurement errors in patients treated for distal radius fracture.MethodsFifty patients treated by volar locking plate fixation for a distal radius fracture constituted the study cohort. Grip strengths were measured 1 year after surgery on the injured and uninjured sides using a dynamometer. Grip strengths before injury were estimated using the grip strengths of the uninjured side with consideration of hand dominance. Patients were asked to rate their subjective level of grip strength weakness at 1 year postoperatively. Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis was used to determine MCIDs. Minimal detectable change in grip strength, which is a statistical estimate of the smallest change between two measurement points expected by measurement error or chance alone, also was determined using the formula 1.65 × √2 × standard error of measurement.ResultsOne year after surgery, grip strength (23 kg; 95% CI, 20–27) was less compared with calculated preinjury values (28 kg; 95% CI, 25–31; p < 0.001). Patients’ rating of grip strength and measured grip strength changes correlated well (p = 0.56). MCIDs were 6.5 kg for grip strength and 19.5% for percentage grip strength. The MCID was not less than the minimum detectable change for grip strength (also 6.5 kg).ConclusionsThe MCID of the grip strength was a decrease of 6.5 kg (19.5%). We believe the MCID of grip strength is useful for evaluating effectiveness of new treatments and for determining appropriate sample size in clinical trials of distal radius fractures.Level of EvidenceLevel III diagnostic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

[1]  H. Doll,et al.  Responsiveness and minimally important change for the Manchester-Oxford foot questionnaire (MOXFQ) compared with AOFAS and SF-36 assessments following surgery for hallux valgus. , 2007, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[2]  Richard W. Bohannon,et al.  Test-retest reliability of grip-strength measures obtained over a 12-week interval from community-dwelling elders. , 2005, Journal of hand therapy : official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists.

[3]  James G Wright,et al.  Erratum: Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: The DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand) (American Journal of Industrial Medicine (1996) 29:6 (602-608)) , 1996 .

[4]  A. Carr,et al.  Comparative responsiveness and minimal change for the Oxford Elbow Score following surgery , 2008, Quality of Life Research.

[5]  D L Riddle,et al.  Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. , 1996, Physical therapy.

[6]  C. Bombardier,et al.  Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: The DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and head) , 1996 .

[7]  J. Katz,et al.  A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. , 1993, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[8]  S. Leopold.  Editor’s Spotlight/Take 5: Comparative Responsiveness and Minimal Clinically Important Differences for Idiopathic Ulnar Impaction Syndrome (DOI 10.1007/s11999-013-2843-8) , 2013, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[9]  C. Bombardier,et al.  Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG) , 1996, American journal of industrial medicine.

[10]  M. Liang,et al.  Measurement Properties of a Self‐Administered Outcome Measure in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis , 1996, Spine.

[11]  J. K. Kim,et al.  Minimal clinically important differences in the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire after carpal tunnel release , 2013, The Journal of hand surgery, European volume.

[12]  P. Hahn,et al.  Normative data on wrist function. , 2012, The Journal of hand surgery.

[13]  H. Connor,et al.  Grip strength and hand dominance: challenging the 10% rule. , 1989, The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association.

[14]  J. K. Kim,et al.  Comparative Responsiveness and Minimal Clinically Important Differences for Idiopathic Ulnar Impaction Syndrome , 2013, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[15]  L. Adolfsson,et al.  Radioulnar laxity and clinical outcome do not correlate after a distal radius fracture , 2011, The Journal of hand surgery, European volume.

[16]  J. Katz,et al.  Symptoms, functional status, and neuromuscular impairment following carpal tunnel release. , 1995, The Journal of hand surgery.

[17]  J. Macdermid,et al.  Development of a scale for patient rating of wrist pain and disability. , 1996, Journal of hand therapy : official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists.

[18]  R. Arora,et al.  A prospective randomized trial comparing nonoperative treatment with volar locking plate fixation for displaced and unstable distal radial fractures in patients sixty-five years of age and older. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[19]  B. Mawr,et al.  Hand strength: normative values. , 1994, The Journal of hand surgery.

[20]  L. Amusa,et al.  Grip strength: effects of testing posture and elbow position. , 1991, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.