Are Patient Expectations and Illness Perception Associated with Patient-reported Outcomes from Surgical Decompression in de Quervain's Tenosynovitis?

Perceptions and emotions in postoperative recovery of patients with perianal diseases

This article examines the complex relationship between disease perception, negative emotions, and their impact on postoperative recovery in patients with perianal diseases. These conditions not only cause physical discomfort, but also carry a significant emotional burden, often exacerbated by social stigma. Psychological factors, including stress, anxiety, and depression, activate neuroendocrine pathways, such as the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, disrupting the gut microbiota and leading to dysbiosis. This disruption can delay wound healing, prolong hospital stay, and intensify pain. Drawing on the findings of Hou et al, our article highlights the critical role of illness perception and negative emotions in shaping recovery outcomes. It advocates for a holistic approach that integrates psychological support and gut microbiota modulation, to enhance healing and improve overall patient outcomes.

Changes in illness perception, pain catastrophizing, and psychological distress following hand surgeon consultation: A prospective study

BACKGROUND

Baseline mindset factors are important factors that influence treatment decisions and outcomes. Theoretically, improving the mindset prior to treatment may improve treatment decisions and outcomes. This prospective cohort study evaluated changes in patients' mindset following hand surgeon consultation. Additionally, we assessed if the change in illness perception differed between surgical and nonsurgical patients.

METHODS

The primary outcome was illness perception, measured using the total score of the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (B-IPQ, range 0-80). Secondary outcomes were the B-IPQ subscales, pain catastrophizing (measured using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)), and psychological distress (measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire-4).

RESULTS

A total of 276 patients with various hand and wrist conditions completed the mindset questionnaires before and after hand surgeon consultation (median time interval: 15 days). The B-IPQ total score improved from 39.7 (±10.6) before to 35.8 (±11.3) after consultation (p < 0.0001, Cohen's d = 0.36); scores also improved for the B-IPQ subscales Coherence, Concern, Emotional Response, Timeline, Treatment Control, and Identity and the PCS. There were no changes in the other outcomes. Surgical patients improved on the B-IPQ subscales Treatment Control and Timeline, while nonsurgical patients did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Illness perception and pain catastrophizing improved following hand surgeon consultation, suggesting that clinicians may actively influence the patients' mindset during consultations, and that they may try to enhance this effect to improve outcomes. Furthermore, surgical patients improved more in illness perceptions, indicating that nonsurgical patients may benefit from a more targeted strategy for changing mindset.

Clinical decision making in the assessment and treatment of closed hand fractures: A scoping review

Introduction

Closed hand fractures represent a significant proportion of emergency department attendances, result in substantial health service utilisation and have a detrimental effect on quality of life. Increasingly, hand therapists in the United Kingdom provide first line fracture treatment. However, the knowledge and skills required to work in such an extended scope capacity have not been elucidated or standardised. This literature review synthesises and reports evidence for the knowledge requisite of clinicians to make evidence-based treatment decisions for patients with hand fractures.

Methods

A systematic search was undertaken, using Embase, MEDLINE, PsychInfo and CINAHL electronic databases. Inclusion criteria were English language, full research reports of studies assessing of the reliability or validity of the decision-making process in hand fracture treatment published between 2013 and 2023. Data were summarised narratively.

Results

15 studies met inclusion criteria; most assessed decision making for metacarpal fractures. Studies on imaging (n = 4) suggested the reliability of plain radiograph interpretation of hand fracture characteristics such as angulation is good and similar across various levels of experience. Agreement between surgeons and therapists in choosing surgical or nonsurgical treatment was generally good, but factors influencing decision making remained unclear. No evidence was identified that explored clinical assessment knowledge (subjective or objective patient factors) or the specific competencies required to treat hand fractures.

Conclusions

There is limited evidence for the knowledge and skills required of clinicians for the competent assessment and treatment of hand fractures. Stakeholder consensus work is required to develop robust competencies and standardise practice.

De Quervain's Tenosynovitis: As Seen from the Perspective of the Patient

Purpose

Patient preferences and expectations following both nonsurgical and operative treatment of de Quervain's tenosynovitis are unclear. In this study, we aim to better delineate patient preferences for initial management of de Quervain's tenosynovitis. For patients considering surgical treatment, we hope to identify which factors of surgical care are most important for patients to receive counseling.

Methods

An online crowdsourcing platform, Amazon Mechanical Turk, was used to recruit study participants. Study participants were then led through a clinical scenario pertaining to de Quervain's tenosynovitis. They were then asked a series of questions regarding initial treatment options, important factors to consider during surgery, and postoperative expectations. A Likert scale was used for responses. Descriptive statistics and one-way analysis of variance were used to assess survey responses.

Results

In total, 199 survey responses were included, and 84% of respondents chose nonsurgical modalities for initial treatment of de Quervain's tenosynovitis. Survey items asking about the importance of cost, risks of surgery, expected recovery time, and expected pain level following surgery revealed that all factors were considered important to respondents. There were no differences between groups in the one-way analysis of variance.

Conclusions

Providers should remain cognizant that patients presenting with de Quervain's tenosynovitis may favor initial nonsurgical management. The vast majority of respondents rated the importance of cost, risks of surgery, expected recovery time, and expected pain level as having some level of importance when considering surgical care. When discussing outcomes of surgery, respondents were nearly divided on what would be considered a successful outcome of surgery. This suggests that treating physicians may benefit from clarifying expected outcomes during surgical discussions.

Type of study/level of evidence

Diagnostics IIb.

Preoperative Indicators of the Effectiveness of Surgical Release in Patients with de Quervain Disease: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of patients report persistent pain after surgical release for de Quervain disease (DQ). This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a surgical release for DQ and to identify the preoperative factors associated with pain after a surgical release for DQ.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 707 patients who underwent surgical release and completed a visual analogue scale questionnaire (VAS; range 0 to 100). We used a paired t test to analyze the effectiveness of the surgical release on pain at 3 months postoperatively compared with the preoperative measure. A hierarchical multivariable linear regression model was created to investigate the contribution of patient-related and disease-related characteristics to postoperative pain.

RESULTS

All VAS domains showed improvement after surgical release. On average, the mean VAS pain decreased by 44 points (95% CI, 42, 46). Smoking (B = 6.37; P < 0.01), younger age (B = -0.35; P < 0.01), longer duration of complaints (B = 0.13; P < 0.01), concomitant surgery (B = 14.40; P < 0.01), and higher VAS pain scores at intake (B = 0.15; P < 0.01) were associated with worse VAS pain scores postoperatively. Together, the variables explained 11% of the variance in mean VAS pain score at 3 months follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that surgical treatment for DQ significantly reduces patient-reported pain. Smoking, younger age, concomitant surgery, duration of complaints, and higher VAS pain scores at intake are associated with worse patient-reported pain 3 months after surgical release. However, the small effects suggest that these factors should not be considered the only important factors.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

Explaining Personalized Activity Limitations in Patients With Hand and Wrist Disorders: Insights from Sociodemographic, Clinical, and Mindset Characteristics

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the association of sociodemographic, clinical, and mindset characteristics on outcomes measured with a patient-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM); the Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS). Secondly, we examined whether these factors differ when a fixed-item PROM, the Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire (MHQ), is used as an outcome.

DESIGN

Cohort study, using the aforementioned groups of factors in a hierarchical linear regression.

SETTING

Twenty-six clinics for hand and wrist conditions in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Two samples of patients with various hand and wrist conditions and treatments: n=7111 (PSFS) and n=5872 (MHQ).

INTERVENTIONS

NA.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The PSFS and MHQ at 3 months.

RESULTS

The PSFS exhibited greater between-subject variability in baseline, follow-up, and change scores than the MHQ. Better PSFS outcomes were associated with: no involvement in litigation (β[95% confidence interval=-0.40[-0.54;-0.25]), better treatment expectations (0.09[0.06;0.13]), light workload (0.08[0.03;0.14]), not smoking (-0.07[-0.13;-0.01]), men sex (0.07[0.02;0.12]), better quality of life (0.07[0.05;0.10]), moderate workload (0.06[0.00;0.13]), better hand satisfaction (0.05[0.02; 0.07]), less concern (-0.05[-0.08;-0.02]), less pain at rest (-0.04[-0.08;-0.00]), younger age (-0.04[-0.07;-0.01]), better comprehensibility (0.03[0.01;0.06]), better timeline perception (-0.03[-0.06;-0.01]), and better control (-0.02[-0.04;-0.00]). The MHQ model was highly similar but showed a higher R2 than the PSFS model (0.41 vs 0.15), largely due to the R2 of the baseline scores (0.23 for MHQ vs 0.01 for PSFS).

CONCLUSIONS

Health care professionals can improve personalized activity limitations by addressing treatment expectations and illness perceptions, which affect PSFS outcomes. Similar factors affect the MHQ, but the baseline MHQ score has a stronger association with the outcome score than the PSFS. While the PSFS is better for individual patient evaluation, we found that it is difficult to explain PSFS outcomes based on baseline characteristics compared with the MHQ. Using both patient-specific and fixed-item instruments helps health care professionals develop personalized treatment plans that meet individual needs and goals.

The Ultrashort Mental Health Screening Tool Is a Valid and Reliable Measure With Added Value to Support Decision-making

BACKGROUND

Mental health influences symptoms, outcomes, and decision-making in musculoskeletal healthcare. Implementing measures of mental health in clinical practice can be challenging. An ultrashort screening tool for mental health with a low burden is currently unavailable but could be used as a conversation starter, expectation management tool, or decision support tool.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Which items of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4), and Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (B-IPQ) are the most discriminative and yield a high correlation with the total scores of these questionnaires? (2) What is the construct validity and added clinical value (explained variance for pain and hand function) of an ultrashort four-item mental health screening tool? (3) What is the test-retest reliability of the screening tool? (4) What is the response time for the ultrashort screening tool?

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study. Data collection was part of usual care at Xpert Clinics, the Netherlands, but prospective measurements were added to this study. Between September 2017 and January 2022, we included 19,156 patients with hand and wrist conditions. We subdivided these into four samples: a test set to select the screener items (n = 18,034), a validation set to determine whether the selected items were solid (n = 1017), a sample to determine the added clinical value (explained variance for pain and hand function, n = 13,061), and a sample to assess the test-retest reliability (n = 105). Patients were eligible for either sample if they completed all relevant measurements of interest for that particular sample. To create an ultrashort screening tool that is valid, reliable, and has added value, we began by picking the most discriminatory items (that is, the items that were most influential for determining the total score) from the PCS, PHQ-4, and B-IPQ using chi-square automated interaction detection (a machine-learning algorithm). To assess construct validity (how well our screening tool assesses the constructs of interest), we correlated these items with the associated sum score of the full questionnaire in the test and validation sets. We compared the explained variance of linear models for pain and function using the screening tool items or the original sum scores of the PCS, PHQ-4, and B-IPQ to further assess the screening tool's construct validity and added value. We evaluated test-retest reliability by calculating weighted kappas, ICCs, and the standard error of measurement.

RESULTS

We identified four items and used these in the screening tool. The screening tool items were highly correlated with the PCS (Pearson coefficient = 0.82; p < 0.001), PHQ-4 (0.87; p < 0.001), and B-IPQ (0.85; p < 0.001) sum scores, indicating high construct validity. The full questionnaires explained only slightly more variance in pain and function (10% to 22%) than the screening tool did (9% to 17%), again indicating high construct validity and much added clinical value of the screening tool. Test-retest reliability was high for the PCS (ICC 0.75, weighted kappa 0.75) and B-IPQ (ICC 0.70 to 0.75, standard error of measurement 1.3 to 1.4) items and moderate for the PHQ-4 item (ICC 0.54, weighted kappa 0.54). The median response time was 43 seconds, against more than 4 minutes for the full questionnaires.

CONCLUSION

Our ultrashort, valid, and reliable screening tool for pain catastrophizing, psychologic distress, and illness perception can be used before clinician consultation and may serve as a conversation starter, an expectation management tool, or a decision support tool. The clinical utility of the screening tool is that it can indicate that further testing is warranted, guide a clinician when considering a consultation with a mental health specialist, or support a clinician in choosing between more invasive and less invasive treatments. Future studies could investigate how the tool can be used optimally and whether using the screening tool affects daily clinic decisions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, diagnostic study.

Changes in illness perception, pain catastrophizing, and psychological distress following hand surgeon consultation: A prospective study

BACKGROUND

Baseline mindset factors are important factors that influence treatment decisions and outcomes. Theoretically, improving the mindset prior to treatment may improve treatment decisions and outcomes. This prospective cohort study evaluated changes in patients' mindset following hand surgeon consultation. Additionally, we assessed if the change in illness perception differed between surgical and nonsurgical patients.

METHODS

The primary outcome was illness perception, measured using the total score of the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (B-IPQ, range 0-80). Secondary outcomes were the B-IPQ subscales, pain catastrophizing (measured using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)), and psychological distress (measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire-4).

RESULTS

A total of 276 patients with various hand and wrist conditions completed the mindset questionnaires before and after hand surgeon consultation (median time interval: 15 days). The B-IPQ total score improved from 39.7 (±10.6) before to 35.8 (±11.3) after consultation (p < 0.0001, Cohen's d = 0.36); scores also improved for the B-IPQ subscales Coherence, Concern, Emotional Response, Timeline, Treatment Control, and Identity and the PCS. There were no changes in the other outcomes. Surgical patients improved on the B-IPQ subscales Treatment Control and Timeline, while nonsurgical patients did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Illness perception and pain catastrophizing improved following hand surgeon consultation, suggesting that clinicians may actively influence the patients' mindset during consultations, and that they may try to enhance this effect to improve outcomes. Furthermore, surgical patients improved more in illness perceptions, indicating that nonsurgical patients may benefit from a more targeted strategy for changing mindset.

Complications and Functional Outcomes following Trigger Finger Release: A Cohort Study of 1879 Patients

BACKGROUND

Although trigger finger release is considered a safe procedure, large cohort studies reporting consistent complication rates and functional outcomes are scarce. Further insight into outcomes of this commonly performed procedure is essential for adequate treatment evaluation and patient counseling. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the complication rates and functional outcomes following trigger finger release.

METHODS

This is an observational multicenter cohort study of patients undergoing trigger finger release. The primary outcome included the occurrence of complications. The secondary outcome was change in hand function (Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire) from baseline to 3 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Complications were observed in 17.1 percent of 1879 patients. Most complications were minor, requiring hand therapy or analgesics (7.0 percent of all patients), antibiotics, or steroid injections (7.8 percent). However, 2.1 percent required surgical treatment and 0.2 percent developed complex regional pain syndrome. The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire total score improved from baseline to 3 months postoperatively with 12.7 points, although the authors found considerable variation in outcomes with less improvement in patients with better baseline scores.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that trigger finger release results in improved hand function, although complications occur in 17 percent. Most complications are minor and can be treated with nonsurgical therapy, resulting in improved hand function as well. However, additional surgical treatment is required in 2 percent of patients. In addition, the authors found that change in hand function depends on the baseline score, with less improvement in patients with better baseline scores. Future studies should investigate factors that contribute to the variability in treatment outcomes following trigger finger release.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Factors associated with self-reported pain and hand function following surgical A1 pulley release

Surgical A1 pulley release can considerably reduce pain and improve hand function, but individual outcomes are highly variable. This study aimed to identify factors contributing to self-reported pain and hand function 3 months postoperatively. We included 2681 patients who had received surgical treatment for a trigger finger or thumb and who completed the Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ). Hierarchical linear regression models were used to investigate patient and clinical characteristics associated with postoperative pain and hand function. For both pain and hand function, the most influential factors associated with worse outcomes were worse MHQ scores at baseline (β 0.38 and 0.33, respectively) and ≥3 preoperative steroid injections (β -0.36 and -0.35). These factors indicated that patients with severe preoperative symptoms represent a group with a more advanced disease that is more difficult to treat. These findings can assist clinicians in patient counselling, expectation management and decision-making about the timing of the intervention.Level of evidence: II.

The impact of psychosocial variables on initial presentation and surgical outcome for ulnar-sided wrist pathology: a cohort study with 1-year follow-up

AIMS

Ulnar-sided wrist pain has historically been equated to lower-back pain of wrist surgery. Little is known about the relationship between psychosocial profile and the manifestation of ulnar-sided wrist pathology and their treatment outcomes. This study aimed to determine the impact of pain catastrophising, psychological distress, illness perception, and patients' outcome expectations on patient-reported pain and hand function before and one year after surgery for ulnar-sided wrist pathology.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included patients who underwent surgical treatment for ulnar-sided wrist pathology. Before surgery, patients completed the Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ), Brief-Illness Perception Questionnaire (B-IPQ), and Credibility/Expectancy Questionnaire (CEQ). Pain and dysfunction were assessed before (n = 423) and one year after surgery (n = 253) using the Patient Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (PRWHE). Hierarchical linear regression was used to assess the relationship between psychosocial factors and the preoperative PRWHE score, postoperative PRWHE score, and change in PRWHE.

RESULTS

Psychosocial variables explained an additional 35% of the variance in preoperative PRWHE scores and 18% on postoperative scores. A more negative psychosocial profile was associated with higher (worse) preoperative PRWHE scores (PCS: B = 0.19, CI = [0.02-0.36]; B-IPQ Consequences: B = 3.26, CI = 2.36-4.15; and B-IPQ Identity, B = 1.88 [1.09-2.67]) and postoperative PRWHE scores (PCS: B = 0.44, CI = [0.08-0.81]) but not with the change in PRWHE after surgery. Higher treatment expectations were associated with a lower (better) postoperative PRWHE score (CEQ expectancy: B = -1.63, CI = [-2.43;-0.83]) and a larger change in PRWHE scores (B =|1.62|, CI = [|0.77; 2.47|]).

CONCLUSION

A more negative psychosocial profile was associated with higher pain levels and dysfunction preoperatively and postoperatively. However, these patients showed similar improvement as patients with a more feasible psychosocial profile. Therefore, patients should not be withheld from surgical treatment based on their preoperative psychosocial profile alone. Boosting treatment expectations might further improve treatment outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III (Cohort study).

"I didn't know what I could do": Behaviors, knowledge and beliefs, and social facilitation after distal radius fracture

BACKGROUND

Biomedical models have limitations in explaining and predicting recovery after distal radius fracture (DRF). Variation in recovery after DRF may be related to patients' behaviors and beliefs, factors that can be framed using a lens of self-management. We conceptualized the self-management process using social cognitive theory as reciprocal interactions between behaviors, knowledge and beliefs, and social facilitation. Understanding this process can contribute to needs identification to optimize recovery.

PURPOSE

Describe the components of the self-management process after DRF from the patient's perspective.

STUDY DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive analysis.

METHODS

Thirty-one adults aged 45-72 with a unilateral DRF were recruited from rehabilitation centers and hand surgeons' practices. They engaged in one semi-structured interview 2-4 weeks after discontinuation of full-time wrist immobilization. Data were analyzed using qualitative descriptive techniques, including codes derived from the data and conceptual framework. Codes and categories were organized using the three components of the self-management process.

RESULTS

Participants engaged in medical, role, and emotional management behaviors to address multidimensional sequelae of injury, with various degrees of self-direction. They described limited knowledge of their condition and its medical management, naive beliefs about their expected recovery, and uncertainty regarding safe movement and use of their extremity. They reported informational, instrumental, and emotional support from health care professionals and a broader circle.

CONCLUSIONS

Descriptions of multiple domains of behaviors emphasized health-promoting actions beyond adherence to medical recommendations. Engagement in behaviors was reciprocally related to participants' knowledge and beliefs, including illness and pain-related perceptions. The findings highlight relevance of health behavior after DRF, which can be facilitated by hand therapists as part of the social environment. Specifically, hand therapists can assess and address patients' behaviors and beliefs to support optimal recovery.

Evaluation of Patient Expectations before Carpal Tunnel Release

Background:

Carpal tunnel release (CTR) is common, yet patient treatment expectations remain unclear. The primary purpose was to describe patient expectations before CTR. Secondarily, we aimed to identify factors influencing expectations.

Methods:

Included patients underwent unilateral or bilateral CTR between 2015 and 2017 at a single academic center. Expectations regarding the level of relief/improvement were queried. Area deprivation index (ADI) was used to measure social deprivation. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with expecting great relief/improvement.

Results:

Of 307 included patients, mean age was 54 ± 16 years and 63% were women. Patients most commonly expected great (58%) or some (23%) relief/improvement. Few patients expected little (3%) or no (4%) relief/improvement, and 13% had no expectations. In the multivariable analysis, male sex, lower social deprivation, and lower BMI were associated with expecting great relief/improvement. Age, surgical technique (open versus endoscopic), use of the operating room versus procedure room, and preoperative factors (constant numbness, weakness/atrophy, duration of symptoms, and QuickDASH) were not associated with expectations.

Conclusions:

Most patients expect some to great improvement after CTR. This was independent of several factors with a known association with worse outcomes (advanced age, atrophy/weakness, and constant numbness). Male sex was associated with the expectation of great improvement, in which superior outcomes relative to females have not been borne out in the literature. These findings highlight patient counseling opportunities. The observed association between social deprivation and expectations warrants further investigation, as the socioeconomically disadvantaged experience worse healthcare outcomes in general.