Recovery,responsiveness and interpretability of patient-reported outcome measures after surgery for Dupuytren’s disease

Abstract

This prospective cohort study investigated the responsiveness and interpretability of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Unité Rhumatologique des Affections de la Main (URAM) outcome measures for assessing recovery after fasciectomy and dermofasciectomy for Dupuytren’s disease. DASH outcome scores at 1 year were significantly better than at 6 weeks, suggesting that recovery is not complete by 6 weeks. Of the 101 patients recruited to the DASH cohort, 71 completed preoperative, 6 week and 1 year postoperative DASH scores; 68 of them completed preoperative and 1 year postoperative DASH scores and an external anchor question. In the URAM cohort, 30/44 completed the preoperative and the 1 year postoperative URAM scores and the anchor question. The DASH score exhibited moderate responsiveness but poor interpretability on receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, such that a minimal important change could not be estimated. The URAM score showed acceptable responsiveness, and an MIC of 10.5 on receiver operating characteristic analysis.

Level of evidence: II

Keywords

Dupuytren’s contracture Dupuytren’s disease Patient-reported outcome measures DASH URAM responsiveness interpretability minimal important difference minimal important change

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ball

Pratt

Nanchahal

Optimal functional outcome measures for assessing treatment for Dupuytren’s disease: a systematic review and recommendations for future practice. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013, 14: 131.

Beaudreuil

Allard

Zerkak

. Unite Rhumatologique des Affections de la Main (URAM) scale: development and validation of a tool to assess Dupuytren’s disease-specific disability. Arthrit Care Res. 2011, 63: 1448–55.

Degreef

Vererfve

De Smet

Effect of severity of Dupuytren contracture on disability. Scand J Plast Recons. 2009, 43: 41–2.

Deyo

Centor

RM.

Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chron Dis. 1986, 39: 897–906.

Engstrand

Boren

Liedberg

GM.

Evaluation of activity limitation and digital extension in Dupuytren’s contracture three months after fasciectomy and hand therapy interventions. J Hand Ther. 2009, 22: 21–6.

Forget

Jerosch-Herold

Shepstone

Higgins

Psychometric evaluation of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) with Dupuytren’s contracture: validity evidence using Rasch modeling. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014, 15: 361.

Garrison

Cook

. Clinimetrics corner: the Global Rating of Change Score (GRoC) poorly correlates with functional measures and is not temporally stable. J Man Manip Ther. 2012, 20: 178–81.

Hurst

Badalamente

Hentz

. Injectable collagenase clostridium histolyticum for Dupuytren’s contracture. N Engl J Med. 2009, 361: 968–79.

Jaeschke

Singer

Guyatt

GH.

Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials. 1989, 10: 407–15.

10.

Jerosch-Herold

Shepstone

Chojnowski

Larson

Severity of contracture and self-reported disability in patients with Dupuytren’s contracture referred for surgery. J Hand Ther. 2011, 24: 6–10.

11.

Kazis

Anderson

Meenan

RF.

Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care. 1989, 27: S178–89.

12.

Kennedy

Beaton

Solway

McConnell

Bombardier

The DASH and QuickDASH Outcome Measure User’s Manual, 3rd ed. Toronto, Institute for Work and Health, 2011.

13.

London

Stepan

Calfee

RP.

Determining the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire minimal clinically important difference by means of three methods. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014, 133: 616–25.

14.

Malay

Chung

KC.

The minimal clinically important difference after simple decompression for ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. J Hand Surg Am. 2013, 38: 652–9.

15.

Mintken

Glynn

Cleland

JA.

Psychometric properties of the shortened disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH) and Numeric Pain Rating Scale in patients with shoulder pain. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2009, 18: 920–6.

16.

Mohan

Vadher

Ismail

Warwick

The Southampton Dupuytren’s Scoring Scheme. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2014, 48: 28–33.

17.

Mokkink

Terwee

Knol

. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010, 10: 22.

18.

Norman

Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2010, 15: 625–32.

19.

Norman

Stratford

Regehr

Methodological problems in the retrospective computation of responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997, 50: 869–79.

20.

Packham

Clinical commentary in response to: Severity of contracture and self-reported disability in patients with Dupuytren’s contracture referred for surgery. J Hand Ther. 2011, 24: 12–4.

21.

Revicki

Hays

Cella

Sloan

Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008, 61: 102–9.

22.

Rodrigues

Zhang

Scammell

Davis

. What patients want from the treatment of Dupuytren’s disease – is the Unité Rhumatologique des Affections de la Main (URAM) scale relevant? J Hand Surg Eur. 2014, 40: 150–4.

23.

Rodrigues

Mabvuure

Nikkhah

Shariff

Davis

TRC.

Minimal clinically important changes and differences in elective hand surgery. J Hand Surg Eur. 2015, 40: 900–12.

24.

Schmitt

Di Fabio

RP.

The validity of prospective and retrospective global change criterion measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005, 86: 2270–6.

25.

Shauver

Chung

KC.

The minimal clinically important difference of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire. J Hand Surg Am. 2009, 34: 509–14.

26.

Szabo

RM.

Outcomes assessment in hand surgery: when are they meaningful?

J Hand Surg Am. 2001, 26: 993–1002.

27.

Testa

MA.

Interpreting quality-of-life clinical trial data for use in the clinical practice of antihypertensive therapy. J Hypertens. 1987, 5: S9–13.

28.

Turner

Schunemann

Griffith

. Using the entire cohort in the receiver operating characteristic analysis maximizes precision of the minimal important difference. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009, 62: 374–9.

29.

Ullah

Dias

Bhowal

Does a ‘firebreak’ full-thickness skin graft prevent recurrence after surgery for Dupuytren’s contracture?: a prospective, randomised trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009, 91: 374–8.

30.

van Rijssen

Gerbrandy

Ter Linden

Klip

Werker

PM.

A comparison of the direct outcomes of percutaneous needle fasciotomy and limited fasciectomy for Dupuytren’s disease: a 6-week follow-up study. J Hand Surg Am. 2006, 31: 717–25.

31.

Waljee

Chung

KC.

Objective functional outcomes and patient satisfaction after silicone metacarpophalangeal arthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis. J Hand Surg Am. 2012, 37: 47–54.

32.

Witthaut

Bushmakin

Gerber

Cappelleri

Le Graverand-Gastineau

MP.

Determining clinically important changes in range of motion in patients with Dupuytren’s Contracture: secondary analysis of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled CORD I study. Clin Drug Invest. 2011, 31: 791–8.

33.

Youden

WJ.

Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer. 1950, 3: 32–5.

34.

Zyluk

Jagielski

The effect of the severity of the Dupuytren’s contracture on the function of the hand before and after surgery. J Hand Surg Eur. 2007, 32: 326–9.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB