The relationship between therapist-rated function and patient-reported outcome measures

Hand therapist use of patient-reported outcomes

BACKGROUND

The use of standardized outcome measures is essential for best clinical practice by hand therapists to determine patient status, progress, and the outcome of interventions. A better understanding of current patient-reported outcome (PRO) use in hand and upper extremity practice is warranted.

PURPOSE

This study sought to understand what outcome measures are being used in clinical practice, how they are being used, and the perceived usefulness of PROs by active members of the American Society of Hand Therapists (ASHT).

STUDY DESIGN

This study employed a cross-sectional design.

METHODS

The web-based survey was distributed through Qualtrics (Qualtrics, Salt Lake City, Utah) to active members of ASHT with an email address on file. The survey consisted of multiple choice and open-ended questions.

RESULTS

A total of 348 members responded to the survey. Seven hundred thirty-two different outcome measures were reported to be used by the hand therapist respondents. The most used outcome measure was QuickDASH by 38% of the respondents. Two hundred seventy-five (88%) indicated that their workplace advocated the use of PROs. Most respondents indicated that there were not constraints preventing the use of a PRO. Few therapists respondents use a psychosocial PRO in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the hand therapist respondents to our survey use a PRO and discuss the results with their clients. The QuickDASH was the PRO used most often by hand therapists. Only a few hand therapists use a psychosocial tool to measure patient status in clinical practice.

The relationship between depression, anxiety, and pain interference with therapy referral and utilization among patients with hand conditions

INTRODUCTION

Patients with upper extremity conditions may also experience symptoms of depression, anxiety, and pain that limit functional recovery.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This study examined the impact of mental health and pain symptoms on referral rates to therapy and utilization of therapy services to achieve functional recovery among patients with common hand conditions.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients from one orthopedic center.

METHODS

Data extraction provided demographics, the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision diagnoses, therapy referral, therapy visit counts, treatment goal attainment, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Depression, Anxiety, and Pain Interference scores. The chi-square test, t-test, and logistic regression analyses assessed associations between baseline PROMIS depression, anxiety, and pain interference to therapy referral, the number of therapy visits, and goal attainment.

RESULTS

Forty-nine percent (172/351) of patients were referred to hand therapy. There was no relationship between three baseline PROMIS scores based on physician referral (t-test P values .32-.67) and no association between PROMIS scores and therapy utilization or goal attainment (Pearson correlation (r): 0.002 to 0.020, P > .05). Referral to therapy was most strongly associated with having a traumatic condition (P < .01). Patients with high depression, anxiety, and pain interference scores on average required one more therapy visit to achieve treatment goals (average visits: 3.7 vs 3.1; 4.1 vs 2.7; 3.4 vs 2.3, respectively). Fewer patients with high depression scores (50%) achieved their long-term goals than patients with low depression scores (69%, P = .20).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' baseline level of depressive symptoms and anxiety do not predict referrals to hand therapy by orthopedic hand surgeons. There is some indication that patients with increased depressive symptoms, anxiety, and pain interference require more therapy with fewer achieving all goals, suggesting that mental health status may affect response to therapy. Therapists may address mental health needs in treatment plans. Future studies should examine if nonreferred patients with depressive symptoms achieve maximal functional recovery.

Pain interference may be an important link between pain severity, impairment, and self-reported disability in participants with wrist/hand pain

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

INTRODUCTION

Pain severity, sensory and motor impairment, and psychological (distress and anxiety) and social factors have previously been related to self-reported disability in persons with wrist and hand pain.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study to determine the relative contribution of pain severity, measures of impairment (sensory and motor function), psychosocial factors, and pain interference on self-reported disability experienced by persons with heterogeneous orthopedic injuries and conditions of the wrist and hand.

METHODS

Measures of disability and pain severity as well as measures of sensory (pressure pain thresholds, joint position sense), motor (grip strength, Purdue pegboard), and cognitive performance (Stroop test) and psychosocial variables related to pain and participation (West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory) were administered to 60 participants with wrist and hand pain. Pearson product correlations controlled for age and sex, and multiple linear regression was performed to determine the relationship between measures of impairment, pain severity, psychosocial variables, and pain interference with self-reported disability assessed with the Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire.

RESULTS

The best-fitting regression model with DASH scores entered as the dependent variable (F_4,50 = 28.8, P < .01) included MPI Pain Interference (β = -0.54), Life Control (β = -0.16), Purdue pegboard scores (β = -0.32), and Stroop test times (β = 0.21). Pain Interference had the strongest correlation with self-reported disability (adjusted R² = 0.67, P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Pain interference appears to be an important factor explaining the link between impairment, pain severity, and self-reported disability. Addressing pain interference may be important to improve outcomes in this population.

A psychometric comparison of patient-reported outcome measures used in pediatric hand therapy

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcome measures are important for research and also for informing clinical practice. The Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI) and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) are commonly used in pediatric hand therapy. Both are validated in research, but no data exist regarding their relative merits for clinical practice.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This study compares the psychometric properties of the PODCI and COPM in children receiving hand therapy to examine their relative utility in clinical practice.

METHODS

We assessed the psychometric properties of the PODCI and COPM in 75 children receiving hand therapy. Treatment outcomes were assessed simultaneously with the PODCI (Upper Extremity Function and Pain and Comfort scales), COPM (Performance and Satisfaction scales) at baseline and posttreatment time points. Interim scores were included for a subset of patients. Each scale was assessed for responsiveness, ceiling effect, and concurrent and discriminate validity.

RESULTS

All scales, except PODCI/Pain from interim to completion, were able to detect changes over the course of therapy. However, both COPM scales demonstrated greater responsiveness and less severe ceiling effects than both PODCI scales at all time points. All scales had weak concurrent validity and limited discriminate validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The COPM is more responsive to changes during treatment and less hindered by a ceiling effect than the PODCI. Weak concurrent validity between the PODCI and COPM suggests that they measure different things in this population.

Misperception of Disease Onset in People with Gradual-Onset Disease of the Upper Extremity

BACKGROUND

Misperception that an established, gradual-onset disease such as osteoarthritis started when the symptoms were first noticed might lead to testing and treatment choices that are inconsistent with what matters most to a patient. In the present study, the primary null hypothesis was that there are no factors associated with patient-reported symptom duration (in months). The secondary null hypotheses were that there are no factors independently associated with (1) a sudden versus gradual perception of disease onset, (2) an event or injury-related versus age-related perceived cause of disease onset, and (3) the magnitude of physical limitations.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 121 patients with an atraumatic, established, gradual-onset condition of the upper extremity completed a demographic questionnaire, measures of mental health (symptoms of depression and anxiety, worst-case thinking, and self-efficacy [the ability to adapt and continue with daily activity] when in pain), measurement of the magnitude of upper extremity-specific limitations, and questions about the perceived course and cause of the disease.

RESULTS

The median patient-reported symptom duration was 12 months (interquartile range, 3 to 36 months). Twenty-two patients (18%) perceived their disease as new, and 29 patients (24%) believed that the condition was related to ≥1 event (injury) rather than being time and age-related. In multivariable analysis, patients with Medicare insurance were independently associated with longer reported symptom duration (in months). Greater self-efficacy was associated with longer symptom duration in bivariate, but not multivariable, analysis. No factors were independently associated with a sudden versus gradual onset of symptoms. Hispanic ethnicity and federal, county, or no insurance were independently associated with the perception that the problem was caused by an injury or event.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 1 in 5 patients misperceived new symptoms as representing a new disease, often as a type of injury. Misperception of the pathology as new had a limited association with unhealthy thoughts and is likely generally responsive to reorientation. We speculate that gentle, strategic reorientation of misperception can protect patients from choices inconsistent with their values.