View in EDS

The minimal important change (MIC) for the pain disability index (PDI) in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The minimal important change (MIC) for the pain disability index (PDI) in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain.
Authors: Mertens, Michel G. C. A. M. (AUTHOR), Köke, Albère (AUTHOR), Groenewegen, Jan S. (AUTHOR), Smeets, Rob J. E. M. (AUTHOR)
Source: Disability & Rehabilitation. May2026, Vol. 48 Issue 10, p3213-3225. 13p.
Subjects: Pain measurement, Chronic pain, Musculoskeletal pain, Disability determination, Logistic regression analysis, Descriptive statistics, Longitudinal method, Data analysis software, Comparative studies, Confidence intervals
Abstract: Purpose: Chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is a prevalent health issue, causing significant limitations in daily functioning. The Pain Disability Index (PDI) is commonly used to measure pain-related disabilities, but its minimal important change (MIC) is understudied in CMP. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to evaluate the MIC of the PDI in individuals with CMP undergoing an interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment (IMPT) program. Methods: A prospective cohort study including individuals who completed a 10-week IMPT program between 2019 and 2024 across rehabilitation clinics in The Netherlands was conducted. The PDI and the Global Perceived Effect (GPE) were used to assess disability and patients' recovery perspective. The MIC was determined using anchor-based predictive modeling, with the GPE as the external anchor. Results: Among the 3656 individuals with CMP included in the analysis, 84.2% reported important improvement and 3.5% reported important deterioration. The MIC for improvement was 6.05 points and 9.27 points for deterioration. The measurement error of the PDI was 16.53 points. Conclusion: The PDI is insufficiently sensitive for assessing clinically meaningful changes in individual patients due to its high measurement error. Alternative measures, such as patient-specific questionnaires or the GPE, are recommended for individual monitoring in clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Currently the Pain Disability Index is not suitable for guiding clinical decisions at the individual level. Further studies are needed to evaluate the utility of the Pain Disability Index in different populations and treatments. Patient-specific outcomes may be more suitable for patients with widespread pain or a diverse complaints pattern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Disability & Rehabilitation is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Description
Abstract:Purpose: Chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is a prevalent health issue, causing significant limitations in daily functioning. The Pain Disability Index (PDI) is commonly used to measure pain-related disabilities, but its minimal important change (MIC) is understudied in CMP. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to evaluate the MIC of the PDI in individuals with CMP undergoing an interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment (IMPT) program. Methods: A prospective cohort study including individuals who completed a 10-week IMPT program between 2019 and 2024 across rehabilitation clinics in The Netherlands was conducted. The PDI and the Global Perceived Effect (GPE) were used to assess disability and patients' recovery perspective. The MIC was determined using anchor-based predictive modeling, with the GPE as the external anchor. Results: Among the 3656 individuals with CMP included in the analysis, 84.2% reported important improvement and 3.5% reported important deterioration. The MIC for improvement was 6.05 points and 9.27 points for deterioration. The measurement error of the PDI was 16.53 points. Conclusion: The PDI is insufficiently sensitive for assessing clinically meaningful changes in individual patients due to its high measurement error. Alternative measures, such as patient-specific questionnaires or the GPE, are recommended for individual monitoring in clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Currently the Pain Disability Index is not suitable for guiding clinical decisions at the individual level. Further studies are needed to evaluate the utility of the Pain Disability Index in different populations and treatments. Patient-specific outcomes may be more suitable for patients with widespread pain or a diverse complaints pattern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:09638288
DOI:10.1080/09638288.2025.2566273