A comparison of six outcome measures across the recovery period after distal radius fixation-Which to use and when?

Distal Radius Fracture Rehabilitation

Distal radius fracture (DRF) is arguably the most common upper extremity fracture resulting from a fall accident. These clinical practice guidelines (CPG) were developed to guide all aspects of the management of DRF by physical therapists and other rehabilitation practitioners, such as certified hand therapists. This CPG employed a systematic review methodology to locate, appraise, and synthesize contemporary evidence while developing practice recommendations for determining the prognosis of outcomes, examination, and interventions while managing individuals with DRF. The quality of the primary studies found in the literature search was appraised using standardized tools. The strength of the available evidence for a particular practice domain (e.g., prognosis or intervention) was graded as strong, moderate, weak, or conflicting, where such gradings guided the level of obligation for each practice recommendation. Lastly, the CPG also provided the gaps in the evidence pool for the rehabilitation of DRF that future research efforts can address. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(9):CPG1-CPG78. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.0301.

Comparison of patient preferences and responsiveness among common patient-reported outcome measures for hand/wrist injuries or disorders

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were developed to examine patients' perceptions of functional health. Most studies compare the responsiveness of each type of questionnaire. However, reports of patient preferences among PROMs commonly used with patients with hand/wrist injuries or disorders are limited. This study aimed to compare patient preferences, factors associated with those preferences and responsiveness among the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ), Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (PRWHE) and EQ-5D in patients with hand/wrist injuries or disorders.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study collected data on 183 patients with hand/wrist injuries or diseases who had visited a hand/wrist outpatient clinic or were hospitalized for surgery between 2017 and 2020. Patients had to be at least 18 years old and able to complete the four questionnaires included in the study. The four PROMs (DASH, MHQ, PRWHE and EQ-5D) were administered to the patients prior to treatment. After completing the questionnaires, patients were asked to answer two open-ended questions regarding their preferences. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify factors related to patient preferences. Results are presented as the relative risk ratio (RRR). The standardized response mean (SRM) was used to evaluate questionnaire responsiveness.

RESULTS

Of the 183 patients, most preferred the PRWHE questionnaire (n = 74, 41%), with the main reasons cited being "specific to injuries/diseases and reflects hand/wrist function (n = 23, 31%)" and "easy to complete (n = 22, 30%)." Sex was found to be associated with patient preference after adjusting for demographic data and reasons for choosing a PROM as confounders (RRR = 0.46, P value = 0.049). The PRWHE had the highest SRM, followed by DASH (0.92 and 0.88, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The PRWHE is the most preferred by patients and is the most responsive questionnaire. It is recommended for use in clinical practice in situations where a clinician would like to use only one PROM for evaluating patients with various types of hand/wrist problems.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic III.

QuickDASH and PRWE Are Not Optimal Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Distal Radial Fracture Due to Ceiling Effect: Potential Implications for Future Research

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the floor and ceiling effects for both the QuickDASH (shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] questionnaire) and the PRWE (Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation) following a distal radial fracture (DRF). Secondary aims were to determine the degree to which patients with a floor or ceiling effect felt that their wrist was "normal" according to the Normal Wrist Score (NWS) and if there were patient factors associated with achieving a floor or ceiling effect.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients in whom a DRF was managed at the study center during a single year was undertaken. Outcome measures included the QuickDASH, PRWE, EuroQol-5 Dimensions-3 Levels (EQ-5D-3L), and NWS.

RESULTS

There were 526 patients with a mean age of 65 years (range, 20 to 95 years), and 421 (80%) were female. Most patients were managed nonsurgically (73%, n = 385). The mean follow-up was 4.8 years (range, 4.3 to 5.5 years). A ceiling effect was observed for both the QuickDASH (22.3% of patients with the best possible score) and the PRWE (28.5%). When defined as a score that differed from the best available score by less than the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the scoring system, the ceiling effect increased to 62.8% for the QuickDASH and 60% for the PRWE. Patients who had a ceiling score on the QuickDASH and the PWRE had a median NWS of 96 and 98, respectively, and those who had a score within 1 MCID of the ceiling score reported a median NWS of 91 and 92, respectively. On logistic regression analysis, a dominant-hand injury and better health-related quality of life were the factors associated with both QuickDASH and PRWE ceiling scores (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The QuickDASH and PRWE demonstrate ceiling effects when used to assess the outcome of DRF management. Some patients achieving ceiling scores did not consider their wrist to be "normal." Future research on patient-reported outcome assessment tools for DRFs should aim to limit the ceiling effect, especially for individuals or groups that are more likely to achieve a ceiling score.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.