Prospective single-surgeon study of 70 patients undergoing endoscopic carpal tunnel release. Uses both a region-specific PROM (MHQ) and a condition-specific PROM (BCTQ) as anchors to calculate MCID values for PROMIS Physical Function, Upper Extremity, and Pain Interference. Compares anchor-based estimates to the traditional distribution-based (half-SD) approach.
When you review PROMIS scores in a carpal tunnel release patient, you need a benchmark — not just a p-value. Before this paper, no anchor-based MCID existed for PROMIS domains in this specific procedure; prior work relied entirely on the distribution-based half-SD method, which this study shows consistently underestimates the threshold for UE and pain outcomes.
Use these ranges in practice: a change of 6–8 points in PROMIS UE and 9–10 points in PROMIS PI (negative direction) represents a clinically meaningful improvement. Changes below ~4 points in either domain likely fall within measurement noise.
PROMIS PF is the wrong tool for tracking isolated hand outcomes. Its anchor-based MCID barely exceeds 1–3 points, it is less responsive than PROMIS UE at every follow-up timepoint, and it captures whole-body physical function rather than upper extremity-specific change. Use PROMIS UE when you want to measure what carpal tunnel release actually does for a patient.
These values are estimates from a single-surgeon, 70-patient cohort. Treat them as a working range until multicenter validation exists, and recognize that comorbidities like diabetes may shift the threshold.
Prospective single-surgeon study of 70 patients undergoing endoscopic carpal tunnel release. Uses both a region-specific PROM (MHQ) and a condition-specific PROM (BCTQ) as anchors to calculate MCID values for PROMIS Physical Function, Upper Extremity, and Pain Interference. Compares anchor-based estimates to the traditional distribution-based (half-SD) approach.
When you review PROMIS scores in a carpal tunnel release patient, you need a benchmark — not just a p-value. Before this paper, no anchor-based MCID existed for PROMIS domains in this specific procedure; prior work relied entirely on the distribution-based half-SD method, which this study shows consistently underestimates the threshold for UE and pain outcomes.
Use these ranges in practice: a change of 6–8 points in PROMIS UE and 9–10 points in PROMIS PI (negative direction) represents a clinically meaningful improvement. Changes below ~4 points in either domain likely fall within measurement noise.
PROMIS PF is the wrong tool for tracking isolated hand outcomes. Its anchor-based MCID barely exceeds 1–3 points, it is less responsive than PROMIS UE at every follow-up timepoint, and it captures whole-body physical function rather than upper extremity-specific change. Use PROMIS UE when you want to measure what carpal tunnel release actually does for a patient.
These values are estimates from a single-surgeon, 70-patient cohort. Treat them as a working range until multicenter validation exists, and recognize that comorbidities like diabetes may shift the threshold.