Patient-Derived Framework for Quality in Hand Surgery: A Qualitative Analysis

A Systematic Review of Qualitative Research in Hand Surgery

No formal review of qualitative research in hand surgery has been previously performed. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the reporting quality of hand surgery qualitative research with the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR), a 21-item checklist. The secondary objectives were to describe qualitative research in hand surgery by domain, determine differences in reporting quality based on use of a reporting guideline, publication of SRQR and journal of publication, and to identify important outcomes in hand surgery conditions. Fifty-five studies were included from MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Emcare. The median SRQR score was 16. The lowest reported sections were context, data collection methods, and data analysis. Qualitative research was found in multiple domains of hand surgery. There was a significant difference between papers that used a reporting guideline and studies published after the publication of the SRQR. Clinical/medical/basic science journals had the highest median SRQR score. Outcomes identified were pain for carpal tunnel syndrome and pain, function, unintentional harm, recurrence, and recovery time for Dupuytren disease. To further improve reporting quality in hand surgery qualitative research, we recommend that investigators ensure they provide rationale for their methodology and become familiar with the SRQR guidelines.

The Influence of Out-of-Pocket Cost on Wrist Fracture Treatment Selection

PURPOSE

Patient-centered care prioritizes patients' specific health needs and desired outcomes based on their preferences, values, and goals. The aim of this study was to evaluate nonclinical factors that affect decision-making related to wrist fracture treatment options.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment was administered via Amazon Mechanical Turk. Participants chose between two treatment options for theoretical wrist fractures. Each choice set contained three levels for four attributes-total out-of-pocket cost, length of cast immobilization, time to return to work, and number of posttreatment follow-up visits-determined using Medicare national average out-of-pocket costs and a range of standard treatment options. Financial stress was evaluated using the InCharge Financial Distress/Financial Well-Being Scale.

RESULTS

A total of 232 responses were collected. The average financial stress score was 6.29 (SD, 1.97), with 22% (52/232) being classified as financially distressed (score < 5.00). Twenty-eight percent of the participants (n = 64) always chose the lowest cost option, and two participants (0.01%) always chose less time in a cast. Over one-third of the participants chose the cheaper monetary option 80% of the time or more. The odds of choosing a lower cost option were 1.06 times greater per $100 decrease in cost in the entire cohort and 1.03 times greater among 166 participants who did not always choose the least expensive option. In monetary terms, relative importance showed that the participants were willing to pay $19.48 and $58.37 for a week less of cast immobilization and out of work, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the important role that out-of-pocket cost plays in decision-making compared with the nonclinical components of two equivalent treatment options.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Providers should be cognizant of the cost associated with treatment options so that information on treatment cost can be incorporated into counseling and shared decision-making with patients undergoing hand surgery.