Joy C. MacDermid

Patient rating of wrist pain and disability : A reliable and valid measurement tool

OBJECTIVE The goal of this study was to develop a reliable and valid tool for quantifying patient-rated wrist pain and disability. DESIGN Survey, tool development, reliability, and validity study. SETTING Upper extremity unit. PARTICIPANTS One hundred members of the International Wrist Investigators were surveyed by mail to assist in development of the scale. Patients with distal radius (n = 64) or scaphoid (n = 35) fractures were enrolled in a reliability study, and 101 patients with distal radius fractures were enrolled in a validity study. INTERVENTION Information from the expert survey, biomechanical literature, and patient interviews was used as a basis for item generation and definition of structural limitations for a scale that would be practical in the clinic. Patients with distal radius or scaphoid fractures completed the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) on two occasions to determine test-retest reliability. Patients with distal radius fractures (n = 101) completed the PRWE and the SF-36 and were tested with traditional impairment measures at baseline and at two, three, and six months after fracture to determine construct and criterion validity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Reliability coefficients (ICCs) and validity correlations (Pearson product moment correlations). RESULTS Patient opinions on pain and on ability to do activities of daily living and work were thought to be the most important dimensions to include in subjective outcome tools. Brevity and simplicity were seen as essential in the clinic environment. A fifteen-item questionnaire (the PRWE) was designed to measure wrist pain and disability. Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICCs > 0.90). Validity assessment demonstrated that the instrument detected significant differences over time (p < 0.01) and was appropriately correlated with alternate forms of assessing parameters of pain and disability. CONCLUSIONS The PRWE provides a brief, reliable, and valid measure of patient-rated pain and disability.

Measurement Properties of the Neck Disability Index: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN Systematic review of clinical measurement. OBJECTIVE To find and synthesize evidence on the psychometric properties and usefulness of the neck disability index (NDI). BACKGROUND The NDI is the most commonly used outcome measure for neck pain, and a synthesis of knowledge should provide a deeper understanding of its use and limitations. METHODS AND MEASURES Using a standard search strategy (1966 to September 2008) and 4 databases (Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and PsychInfo), a structured search was conducted and supplemented by web and hand searching. In total, 37 published primary studies, 3 reviews, and 1 in-press paper were analyzed. Pairs of raters conducted data extraction and critical appraisal using structured tools. Ranking of quality and descriptive synthesis were performed. RESULTS Horizon estimation suggested the potential for 1 missed paper. The agreement between raters on quality assessments was high(kappa = 0.82). Half of the studies reached a quality level greater than 70%. Failures to report clear psychometric objectives/hypotheses or to rationalize the sample size were the most common design flaws. Studies often focused on less clinically applicable properties, like construct validity or group reliability, than transferable data, like known group differences or absolute reliability (standard error of measurement [SEM] or minimum detectable change [MDC]). Most studies suggest that the NDI has acceptable reliability, although intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) range from 0.50 to 0.98. Longer test intervals and the definition of stable can influence reliability estimates. A number of high-quality published (Korean, Dutch, Spanish, French, Brazilian Portuguese) and commercially supported translations are available. The NDI is considered a 1-dimensional measure that can be interpreted as an interval scale. Some studies question these assumptions. The MDC is around 5/50 for uncomplicated neck pain and up to 10/50 for cervical radiculopathy. The reported clinically important difference (CID) is inconsistent across different studies ranging from 5/50 to 19/50. The NDI is strongly correlated (>0.70) to a number of similar indices and moderately related to both physical and mental aspects of general health. CONCLUSION The NDI has sufficient support and usefulness to retain its current status as the most commonly used self-report measure for neck pain. More studies of CID in different clinical populations and the relationship to subjective/work/function categories are required.

Measuring shoulder function: A systematic review of four questionnaires

OBJECTIVE To conduct a systematic review of the quality and content of the psychometric evidence relating to 4 shoulder disability scales: the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and the Simple Shoulder Test (SST). METHODS We conducted a structured search using 3 databases (Medline, CINAHL, EMBase). In total, 71 published primary studies were analyzed. A pair of raters conducted data extraction and critical appraisal using structured tools. A descriptive synthesis was performed. RESULTS Quality ratings of 55% of the studies reviewed reached a level of > or =75%. Most studies suggest that all 4 questionnaires have excellent reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient > or =0.90). The 4 questionnaires are strongly correlated (r >0.70) with each other and with a number of similar indices, and the questionnaires were able to differentiate between different populations and disability levels. The minimal detectable change (MDC) is approximately 9.4 for the ASES, 10.5 for the DASH, and 18 for the SPADI; the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is approximately 6.4 for the ASES and 10.2 for the DASH, and ranges between 8 and 13 for the SPADI. MDC and MCID have not been defined for the SST. CONCLUSION The psychometric properties of the ASES, DASH, and SPADI have been shown to be acceptable for clinical use. Conversely, some properties of the SST still need be evaluated, particularly the absolute errors of measurement. Overall, validation studies have focused on less clinically relevant properties (construct validity or group reliability) than estimates of MDC and MCID.

Arthroplasty with a Metal Radial Head for Unreconstructible Fractures of the Radial Head

Background: Treatment of unreconstructible comminuted fractures of the radial head remains controversial. There is limited information on the outcome of management of these injuries with arthroplasty with a metal radial head implant. Methods: The functional outcomes of arthroplasties with a metal radial head implant for the treatment of twenty‐five displaced, unreconstructible fractures of the radial head in twenty‐four consecutive patients (mean age, fifty-four years) were evaluated at a mean of thirty‐nine months (minimum, two years). There were ten Mason type-III and fifteen Mason‐Johnston type-IV injuries. Two of these injuries were isolated, and twenty‐three were associated with other elbow fractures and/or ligamentous injuries. Results: At the time of follow-up, Short Form-36 (SF‐36) summary scores suggested that overall health-related quality of life was within the normal range (physical component = 47 ± 10, and mental component = 49 ± 13). Other outcome scales indicated mild disability of the upper extremity (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score = 17 ± 19), wrist (Patient‐Rated Wrist Evaluation score = 17 ± 21 and Wrist Outcome Score = 60 ± 10), and elbow (Mayo Elbow Performance Index = 80 ± 16). According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, three results were graded as poor; five, as fair; and seventeen, as good or excellent. The poor and fair outcomes were associated with concomitant injury in two patients, a history of a psychiatric disorder in three, comorbidity in two, a Workers’ Compensation claim in two, and litigation in one. Subjective patient satisfaction averaged 9.2 on a scale of 1 to 10. Elbow flexion of the injured extremity averaged 140° ± 9°; extension, -8° ± 7°; pronation, 78° ± 9°; and supination, 68° ± 10°. A significant loss of elbow flexion and extension and of forearm supination occurred in the affected extremity, which also had significantly less strength of isometric forearm pronation (17%) and supination (18%) as well as significantly less grip strength (p < 0.05). Asymptomatic bone lucencies surrounded the stem of the implant in seventeen of the twenty-five elbows. Valgus stability was restored, and proximal radial migration did not occur. Complications, all of which resolved, included one complex regional pain syndrome, one ulnar neuropathy, one posterior interosseous nerve palsy, one episode of elbow stiffness, and one wound infection. Conclusions: Patients treated with a metal radial head implant for a severely comminuted radial head fracture will have mild-to-moderate impairment of the physical capability of the elbow and wrist. At the time of short-term follow-up, arthroplasty with a metal radial head implant was found to have been a safe and effective treatment option for patients with an unreconstructible radial head fracture; however, long‐term follow‐up is still needed.

Development of a scale for patient rating of wrist pain and disability.

W rist fractures are the most prevalent of all fractures. Although they occur in all age groups secondary to trauma, wrist fractures have an increased incidence in postmenopausal women related to osteoporotic changes in the bones.1 To date, measurement of outcome, determination of prognostic factors, and comparison of different treatment methods have been hampered by the lack of outcome tools.z,3 A number of scoring systems have been developed for wrist fracture outcome.4,s These systems have been designed primarily by clinicians based on their personal experience with wrist fracture evaluation and treatment and rely on radiographic measures and clinician/observer evaluation of functional deficits. Although these scales have been useful in encouraging different authors to report clinical results in a similar manner, they have several methodologic and clinical flaws. First, they tend to focus on the clinicians interpretation of the patients loss of function, not on the patients o~n experience. In recent years, how~ver, a refoc~sm9 of health evaluation has emphasized the patients assessments of their functional ability. Second, these scales are not standardized because they do not include details on measurement procedures, reliability, or validityY This paper outlines the progress on development of a wrist outcome measurement tool. The study has evolved to the point where a patientrated wrist score is now ready for general use. A performance-based impairment rating still requires further development to find methods that portray a valid global indicator of wrist function and can be performed reliably in an average hand clinic. While researching and developing these tools, a number of decisions had to be made based on results of an expert survey, literature review, pilot testing, consensus exercises, and reliability and validity testing. Choices were based on the need to create a tool that was both scientifically sound as well as practical in the clinical situation (Fig. 1). This project to date has taken 3 years and has resulted in eight background studies that were

Functional outcome of semiconstrained total elbow arthroplasty.

Background: The objective of the present study was to review the results of primary total elbow arthroplasty with use of the Coonrad-Morrey prosthesis. Two hypotheses were tested: (1) the results in patients with inflammatory arthritis would be superior to those in patients with a traumatic or posttraumatic condition, and (2) the isometric extensor torque after total elbow arthroplasty would be significantly less than that of the contralateral elbow. Methods: Forty-seven consecutive patients (fifty-one elbows) had the operation performed by one of three surgeons between November 1, 1989, and June 30, 1996. Thirty-six surviving patients (thirty-nine elbows) were available for follow-up. The mean duration (and standard deviation) of follow-up was 50 ± 11 months (range, twenty-four to ninety-seven months). The mean age at the time of the operation was 64 ± 11 years (range, twenty-seven to eighty-seven years). Eighteen patients (twenty-one elbows) had inflammatory arthritis. Eighteen patients (eighteen elbows) had an acute fracture or posttraumatic condition (posttraumatic osteoarthritis in eight, an acute fracture of the humerus in seven, nonunion of the distal aspect of the humerus in two, and primary osteoarthritis in one). The patients were evaluated with use of questionnaires (the Mayo elbow performance index, the Short Form-36 [SF-36], and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] Questionnaire); clinical examination by an orthopaedic surgeon who was not involved with the preoperative, operative, postoperative, or follow-up care; radiographs; and elbow strength-testing with an isokinetic dynamometer. Results: The mean score (and standard deviation) on the Mayo elbow performance index for the group that had inflammatory arthritis (90 ± 11 points) was significantly higher than that for the group with a traumatic or posttraumatic condition (78 ± 18 points) at the time of the latest follow-up (p < 0.05). In both groups, the mean extensor torque of the involved elbow was significantly less than that of the contralateral elbow (p < 0.05). No significant difference between the groups was found with respect to the flexion-extension arc of motion. Ten elbows (26 percent) had ulnar nerve dysfunction (a transient deficit in six and a permanent deficit in four); nine (23 percent), an intraoperative fracture (of the humeral diaphysis in four, of the ulnar diaphysis in four, and of the olecranon in one); three (8 percent), a periprosthetic infection; three, a triceps disruption; and one (3 percent), a revision because of a fracture of the ulnar component. There were no other revisions. Of the thirty-four elbows with complete radiographic follow-up, twenty-three had no change in the bone-cement interface. Progressive radiolucency was noted around the ulnar prosthesis in eight elbows, around the humeral prosthesis in one elbow, and around both components in two elbows. Conclusions: Patients who had a total elbow arthroplasty with use of a semiconstrained Coonrad-Morrey prosthesis were generally satisfied; the mean level of patient satisfaction was 9.2 of a possible 10 points for those who had inflammatory arthritis and 8.6 points for those who had a fracture or posttraumatic condition. The rates of complications involving the ulnar nerve, intraoperative fracture, triceps disruption, deep infection, and periprosthetic radiolucency are of concern.

Proximal humeral fractures: A systematic review of treatment modalities

A systematic review was conducted of primary intervention of proximal humeral fracture, which is a common injury with significant morbidity. Keywords of proximal humeral fracture were entered into PubMed and Embase databases. Two evaluators reviewed abstracts from 1985 to 2004 for inclusion and exclusion criteria yielding 66 articles. These articles were evaluated independently for outcomes and quality of evidence using the Structured Effectiveness Quality Evaluation Scale and Sacketts Levels of Evidence. Patient characteristics and outcomes were recorded. The 66 studies included 2155 patients grouped by fracture types according to the Neer classification system. Studies differed by intervention, methods, outcome measures and results. Quality scores averaged 15/48; only 2 articles included randomized groups. Current studies typically lack randomization, comparators, and independent evaluation, with a resultant inability to produce clinical conclusions. Further research comparing primary treatment methods in a properly designed and controlled fashion is required, ideally using randomized controlled trials.

Comminuted radial head fractures treated with a modular metallic radial head arthroplasty : Study of outcomes

BACKGROUND Comminuted fractures of the radial head are challenging to treat with open reduction and internal fixation. Radial head arthroplasty is an alternative treatment with results that compare favorably with those reported after open reduction and internal fixation of similar fractures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the two-year outcomes and the rate of recovery of a closely followed cohort of patients in whom an unreconstructible radial head fracture had been treated with a modular metallic prosthesis. METHODS Twenty-six patients (seventeen female and nine male; mean age, fifty-four years) with an unreconstructible comminuted radial head fracture and associated elbow injuries were treated with a modular metallic radial head arthroplasty. Patients who had presented more than four weeks following the injury or had had the radial head arthroplasty as a second-stage or salvage procedure were excluded. Of the twenty-six patients, twenty-two had an associated elbow dislocation, and thirteen of them also had an associated fracture of the coronoid process. Patients were prospectively followed at three, six, twelve, and twenty-four months. Self-reported limb function, general health, range of motion, and isometric strength were assessed by an independent observer. RESULTS Following treatment of the injury, significant decreases in self-reported and measured impairments were noted over time, with the majority of the recovery occurring by six months and little further recovery noted between six and twenty-four months. There were slight-to-moderate deficits in the range of motion and strength compared with the values on the contralateral, unaffected side. Patient satisfaction was high at three months and remained high at two years. All elbow joints remained stable, no implant required revision, and there was no evidence of overstuffing of the joint. Mild osteoarthritis was seen in five (19%) of the twenty-six patients. CONCLUSIONS An arthroplasty with a modular metallic radial head is a safe and effective option for the treatment of unreconstructible radial head fractures associated with other elbow injuries. Recovery primarily occurs by six months, with minimal additional improvements over the next eighteen months.

Reliability of range-of-motion measurement in the elbow and forearm***

The purpose of this study was to examine intratester, intertester, and interdevice reliability of range of motion measurements of the elbow and forearm. Elbow flexion and extension and forearm pronation and supination were measured on 38 subjects with elbow, forearm, or wrist disease by 5 testers. Standardized test methods and a randomized order of testing were used to test groups of patients with universal standard goniometers, a computerized goniometer, and a mechanical rotation measuring device. Intratester reliability was high for all 3 measuring devices. Meaningful changes in intratester range of motion measurements taken with a universal goniometer occur with 95% confidence if they are greater than 6 degrees for flexion, 7 degrees for extension, 8 degrees for pronation, and 8 degrees for supination. Intertester reliability was high for flexion and extension measurements with the computerized goniometer and moderate for flexion and extension measurements with the universal goniometer. Meaningful change in interobserver range of motion measurements was expected if the change was greater than 4 degrees for flexion and 6 degrees for extension with the computerized goniometer compared with 10 degrees and 10 degrees, respectively, if the universal goniometer was used. Intertester reliability was high for pronation and supination with all 3 devices. Meaningful change in forearm rotation is characterized by a minimum of 10 degrees for pronation and 11 degrees for supination with the universal goniometer. Reliable measurements of elbow and forearm arm movement are obtainable regardless of the level of experience when standardized methods are used. Measurement error was least for repeated measurements taken by the same tester with the same instrument and most when different instruments were used.

Reliability, Standard Error, and Minimum Detectable Change of Clinical Pressure Pain Threshold Testing in People With and Without Acute Neck Pain

STUDY DESIGN Clinical measurement. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the intrarater, interrater, and test-retest reliability of an accessible digital algometer, and to determine the minimum detectable change in normal healthy individuals and a clinical population with neck pain. BACKGROUND Pressure pain threshold testing may be a valuable assessment and prognostic indicator for people with neck pain. To date, most of this research has been completed using algometers that are too resource intensive for routine clinical use. METHODS Novice raters (physiotherapy students or clinical physiotherapists) were trained to perform algometry testing over 2 clinically relevant sites: the angle of the upper trapezius and the belly of the tibialis anterior. A convenience sample of normal healthy individuals and a clinical sample of people with neck pain were tested by 2 different raters (all participants) and on 2 different days (healthy participants only). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement, and minimum detectable change were calculated. RESULTS A total of 60 healthy volunteers and 40 people with neck pain were recruited. Intrarater reliability was almost perfect (ICC = 0.94-0.97), interrater reliability was substantial to near perfect (ICC = 0.79-0.90), and test-retest reliability was substantial (ICC = 0.76-0.79). Smaller change was detectable in the trapezius compared to the tibialis anterior. CONCLUSIONS This study provides evidence that novice raters can perform digital algometry with adequate reliability for research and clinical use in people with and without neck pain.