Woldendorp KH, de Schipper AW, Boonstra AM, van der Sluis CK, Arendzen JH, Reneman MF. Reliability of an instrument for screening hand profiles: The Practical Hand Evaluation.
J Hand Ther 2019;
31:544-553.e1. [PMID:
30318242 DOI:
10.1016/j.jht.2018.05.002]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2018] [Revised: 04/20/2018] [Accepted: 05/09/2018] [Indexed: 02/09/2023]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN
Psychometric study with 2-week interval.
INTRODUCTION
Musculoskeletal hand complaints are common among manual workers. Mismatch between anthropometric hand features and tasks can affect the ability to perform hand activities, with an increased risk of complaints. Although screening of these features may improve diagnosis and treatment, no validated screening tool is available. The Practical Hand Evaluation (PHE) screening tool might fill this gap, but its psychometric properties are unknown.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
To test the reliability of the PHE and to explore the feasibility of item reduction of the PHE.
METHODS
Right-hand profiles of 117 healthy volunteers (66 women, 51 men; mean age, 22.8 years) were independently assessed 4 times by 6 couples of researchers using the PHE, twice on day 1 and twice 2-3 weeks later. Intrarater and inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlations), standard error of measurement (SEM), potential confounding factors (gender, joint hyperlaxity, and measurement order) affecting the instrument's reliability (limits of agreement), and collinearity between the PHE items were determined (variation inflation factor analysis and hierarchical clustering of correlation coefficients).
RESULTS
The intrarater and inter-rater reliabilities of the PHE were good for 12 of 14 items (86%; r = 0.67-0.90). Absolute SEM varied between 2.01 and 9.23 mm. The percentage of shifts of at least 2 classes in a repeated measurement was <15%. Cluster analysis identified 6 clusters of hand items.
DISCUSSION
The reliability for nearly all PHE items is good. Measurement errors were substantial relative to variances in the reference population, but not to gender, joint laxity and order of administration. Clustering into 6 seperated clusters of items was possible.
CONCLUSIONS
The PHE fulfills many of the criteria for screening of anthropometrics of the hand. Its reliability is high. The SEM might be improved with future adaptations toward a digital photographic PHE. Reduction to 6 items seems also possible.
Collapse