This article presents the methodological requirements for clinical examination and patient-reported outcomes measurements. The assessment of any measurement for clinical research in hand surgery is difficult. A method of measuring a criterion could be 100% reliable but 100% invalid. Bias may be present in our assessment if we do not take into account the methodological requirements related to reliability, validity, and responsiveness of our measures. Reliability refers to intra-observer agreement, inter-observer agreement, or agreement between two methods of assessment, and, for patient-reported measures, internal consistency and test–retest reliability. Validity is the capability of a clinical method to measure what it proposes to measure. Assessing validity involves comparing a measure with one or more other measures, and, if possible, with a reference standard criterion. Responsiveness is the ability to detect important clinical change. The Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments provides the standards required for design and recommended statistical analyses of patient-reported outcome measures.
AmadioPC. Outcome assessment in hand surgery. Clin Plast Surg. 1997, 24: 191–4.
2.
AtroshiILyrénPEGummessonC. The 6-item CTS symptoms scale: a brief outcomes measure for carpal tunnel syndrome. Qual Life Res. 2009, 18: 347–58.
3.
Ballesteros-BetancourtJRosalesRSGarcía-TarriñoRRiosJCombalia-AleuALlusá-PérezM. A biomechanical comparison of the modified Bunnell pullout and Teo intraosseous suture techniques for attachment of tendon to bone. J Hand Surg Eur. 2019, 44: 816–24.
4.
BeatonDEWrightJGKatzJN;. Upper Extremity Collaborative GroupDevelopment of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005, 87: 1038–46.
5.
BlandMAltmanDG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1981, 1: 307–10.
CicchettiDVFeinsteinAR. High agreement but low Kappa: II. Resolving the paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990, 43: 551–8.
8.
CohenJ. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin. 1968, 70: 213–20.
9.
CronbachLJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951, 16: 297–334.
10.
de VetHCTerweeCBOsteloRWBeckermanHKnolDLBouterLM. Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006, 22: 54.
11.
Domenech JM. Fundamentos de Diseño y Estadistica. 18th ed. Barcelona, Signo, 2017.
12.
EdelenMOReeveBB. Applying item response theory (IRT) modeling to questionnaire development, evaluation, and refinement. Qual Life Res. 2007, 16(Suppl 1): 5–18.
13.
FleissJLCohenJ. The equivalence of weighted Kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Edu Psychol Meas. 1973, 33: 613–9.
14.
FleissJLLevinBPainkMC2003Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 5983rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 598: 608.
15.
GuilleminFBombardierCBeatonD. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993, 46: 1417–32.
16.
GummesonCAtroshiIEkdahlC. The quality of reporting and outcome measures in randomized clinical trials related to upper-extremity disorders. J Hand Surg Am. 2004, 29: 727–34.
17.
KennedyCABeatonDESolwaySMcConnellSBombardierC2011The DASH and QuickDASH outcome measure user's manual, 3rd edn. Toronto, Ontario: Institute for Work & Health.
18.
LandisJRKochGG. The measurements of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977, 33: 159–74.
LinLI. Assay validation using the concordance correlation coefficient. Biometrics. 1992, 48: 599–604.
21.
LyrénPEAtroshiI. Using item response theory improved responsiveness of patient-reported outcomes measures in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012, 65: 325–34.
22.
MacDermidJCWesselJHumphreyRRossDRothJH. Validity of self-report measures of pain and disability for persons who have undergone arthroplasy for osteoarthritis of the carpometacarpal joint of the hand. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. 2007, 15: 524–30.
23.
MohanAVadherJIsmailHWarwickD. The Southampton Dupuytren's Scoring Scheme. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2014, 48: 28–33.
24.
MokkinkLBTerweeCBKnolDL, et al.The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010, 18: 22.
25.
PassingHBablokW. Comparison of several regression procedures for method comparison studies and determination of sample sizes. Application of linear regression procedures for method comparison studies in Clinical Chemistry, Part II. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem. 1984, 22: 431–45.
26.
PetersenMAGroenvoldMBjornerJB, et al.Use of differential item functioning analysis to assess the equivalence of translations of a questionnaire. Qual Life Res. 2003, 12: 373–85.
27.
Rodrigues J. Different terminologies that help the interpretation of outcomes. J Hand Surg Eur. 2020, 45: 97–9.
28.
RodriguesJNMabvuureNTNikkhahDShariffZDavisTR. Minimal important changes and differences in elective hand surgery. J Hand Surg Eur. 2015, 40: 900–12.
29.
RodriguesJZhangWScammellB, et al.Validity of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand patient-reported outcome measure (DASH) and the QuickDASH when used in Dupuytren's disease. J Hand Surg Eur. 2016, 41: 589–99.
30.
RosalesRS. Clinical research in hand surgery. J Hand Surg Eur. 2015, 40: 546–8.
31.
RosalesRSAtroshiI. Basics of statistics for clinical research in hand surgery. Rev Iberam Cir Mano. 2018, 46: 141–16.
32.
RosalesRSDelgadoEBDíez de la Lastra-BoschI. Evaluation of the Spanish version of the DASH and carpal tunnel syndrome health-related quality-of-life instruments: cross-cultural adaptation process and reliability. J Hand Surg Am. 2002, 27: 334–43.
33.
RosalesRSDiez de la LastraIMcCabeSOrtega MartinezJIHidalgoYM. The relative responsiveness and construct validity of the Spanish version of the DASH instrument for outcomes assessment in open carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Eur. 2009, 34: 72–5.
34.
RosalesRSGarcía-GutierrezRReboso-MoralesLAtroshiI. The Spanish version of the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation outcome measure: cross-cultural adaptation process, reliability, measurement error and construct validity. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017, 24: 169.
35.
RosalesRSMartin-HidalgoYReboso-MoralesLAtroshiI. Reliability and construct validity of the Spanish version of the 6-item CTS symptoms scale for outcomes assessment in carpal tunnel syndrome. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016, 3: 115.
36.
RosalesRSReboso-MoralesLMartin-HidalgoYDiez de la Lastra-BoschI. Level of evidence in hand surgery. BMC Res Notes. 2012, 2: 665.
37.
SebastinSJLimAY. Clinical assessment of absence of the palmaris longus and its association with other anatomical anomalies — a Chinese population study. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2006, 35: 249–53.
38.
SaterMSDharapASAbu-HijlehMF. The prevalence of absence of the palmaris longus muscle in the Bahraini population. Clin Anat. 2010, 23: 956–61.
39.
SilmanAJ1995Epidemiological studies: a practical guide, New York: Cambridge University Press.
40.
TerweeCBMokkinkLBKnolDLOsteloRWBouterLMde VetHC. Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res. 2012, 21: 651–7.
41.
Van AbswoudeAAHVan der ArkLASijtsmaK. A comparative study of test data dimensionality assessment procedures under nonparametric IRT models. Applied Psychol Meas. 2004, 28: 3–24.
42.
VazSFalkmerTPassmoreAEParsonsRAndreouP. The case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test–retest reliability. PLoS One. 2013, 8: e73990.
43.
WareJEJrGandekBLKellerSD1996The IQOLA Project Group. Evaluating instruments used cross-nationally: methods from the IQOLA project. In: SpilkerB (ed) Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials, 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, pp. 337–46.
44.
WilckeMTAbbaszadeganHAdolphsonPY. Evaluation of a Swedish version of the patient-rated wrist evaluation outcome questionnaire: good responsiveness, validity, and reliability, in 99 patients recovering from a fracture of the distal radius. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2009, 43: 94–101.
45.
World Health Organization. How to use the ICF: a practical manual for using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Exposure draft for comment. Geneva, WHO, 2013.
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.
