Distal radius fractures (DRF) are common injuries seen by therapists. Patient Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMs) are a way to measure recovery, yet previous research suggests PROM utilisation is low amongst therapists. This study looks at current use of condition specific PROMs amongst UK therapists treating patients with DRF and explores possible barriers and facilitators to their use.
Methods
An online anonymised cross-sectional survey hosted on Qualtrics software was distributed to UK physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and therapy technicians via special interest groups and social media. Analysis was carried out on Excel and Qualtrics Software.
Results
There were 60 responses to the survey. For therapists who use PROMs the Quick-Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, and Patient Reported Wrist Evaluation were the most used, but many therapists reported never using a PROM. Barriers identified included not having enough time in a therapy session, already collecting generic PROMs, and current PROMs did not add to their clinical reasoning. Therapists reported current condition specific PROMs did not capture the psychosocial impact of a DRF or help to assess return to full function.
Conclusion
NHS managers should explore opportunities to collect generic PROMs in a way that has the least impact on clinician time. The development of a Core Outcome Set for hand and wrist trauma may help therapists to identify a toolkit of PROMs to measure different aspects of recovery from this injury but further research is needed to understand the utility of PROMs over individualised therapist assessment.
MeenaSSharmaPSambhariaAK, et al.Fractures of distal radius: an overview. J Fam Med Prim Care2014; 3: 325–332.
2.
NellansKWKowalskiEChungKC. The epidemiology of distal radius fractures. Hand Clin2012; 28: 113–125.
3.
StirlingERBJohnsonNADiasJJ. Epidemiology of distal radius fractures in a geographically defined adult population. J Hand Surg Eur2018; 43: 974–982.
4.
SternBZNjelesaniJHoweT-H. Transitioning from hurting to healing: self-management after distal radius fracture. Disabil Rehabil2021; 44: 6277–6286.
5.
de PutterCESellesRWPolinderS, et al.Economic impact of hand and wrist injuries: health-care costs and productivity costs in a population-based study. J Bone Joint Surg Am2012; 94: e56.
6.
ChangulaniMOkonkwoUKeswaniT, et al.Outcome evaluation measures for wrist and hand – which one to choose?Int Orthop2008; 32: 1–6.
7.
ChurrucaKPomareCEllisLA, et al.Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): a review of generic and condition-specific measures and a discussion of trends and issues. Health Expect2021; 24: 1015–1024.
8.
MacDermidJCStratfordP. Applying evidence on outcome measures to hand therapy practice. J Hand Ther2004; 17: 165–173.
SnowdonDASrikanthVBeareR, et al.A landscape assessment of the use of patient reported outcome measures in research, quality improvement and clinical care across a healthcare organisation. BMC Health Serv Res2023; 23: 94.
11.
CellaD. Patient-reported outcomes in performance measurement. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI Press/RTI International, 2015.
12.
HudakPLAmadioPCBombardierC. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The upper extremity collaborative group (UECG). Am J Ind Med1996; 29: 602–608.
13.
ZiebartCBobosPFurtadoR, et al.Patient-reported outcome measures used for hand and wrist disorders: an overview of systematic reviews. J Hand Ther2023; 36: 719–729.
14.
MacDermidJC. Development of a scale for patient rating of wrist pain and disability. J Hand Ther1996; 9: 178–183.
15.
GartlandJJWerleyCW. Evaluation of healed Colles’ fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am1951; 33-A: 895–907.
16.
ChungKCPillsburyMSWaltersMR, et al.Reliability and validity testing of the Michigan hand outcomes questionnaire. J Hand Surg1998; 23: 575–587.
17.
CooneyWPBusseyRDobynsJH, et al.Difficult wrist fractures perilunate fracture-dislocations of the wrist. Clin Orthop Relat Res1987; 214: 136–147.
18.
DacombePJAmirfeyzRDavisT. Patient-reported outcome measures for hand and wrist trauma: is there sufficient evidence of reliability, validity, and responsiveness?Hand (N Y)2016; 11: 11–21.
19.
BriggsMSRethmanKKCrookesJ, et al.Implementing patient-reported outcome measures in outpatient rehabilitation settings: a systematic review of facilitators and barriers using the consolidated framework for implementation research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2020; 101: 1796–1812.
20.
FennellyOBlakeCDesmeulesF, et al.Patient-reported outcome measures in advanced musculoskeletal physiotherapy practice: a systematic review. Musculoskeletal Care2018; 16: 188–208.
21.
Rasmussen-BarrELindqvistCÖstholsS, et al.Are patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) useful in low back pain? Experiences of physiotherapists in primary health care in Sweden. Musculoskelet Sci Pract2021; 55: 102414.
22.
MeerhoffGAvan DulmenSACruijsbergJK, et al.Which factors influence the use of patient-reported outcome measures in Dutch physiotherapy practice? A cross-sectional study. Physiother Can2020; 72: 63–70.
23.
DuncanEAMurrayJ. The barriers and facilitators to routine outcome measurement by allied health professionals in practice: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res2012; 12: 96.
24.
ValdesKNaughtonNRiderJV. Hand therapist use of patient-reported outcomes. J Hand Ther2024; 37: 110–117.
25.
KarantanaADavisTKennedyD, et al.Common hand and wrist conditions: creation of UK research priorities defined by a James Lind alliance priority setting partnership. BMJ Open2021; 11: e044207.
26.
ValdesKMacDermidJAlgarL, et al.Hand therapist use of patient report outcome (PRO) in practice: a survey study. J Hand Ther2014; 27: 299–307.
27.
TsangPWaltonDGrewalR, et al.Validation of the QuickDASH and DASH in patients with distal radius fractures through agreement analysis archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2017; 98: 1217–1239.
28.
RollsCNuttallJ. A survey of practice on the use of condition-specific patient reported outcome measures with patients who have distal radius fractures. Open Science Framework. https://osf.io/dnk7f/.
29.
NewingtonLCehDSandfordF, et al.Supporting work participation for adults with hand and upper limb conditions: a survey of the British Association of hand therapists. Hand Ther2024; 29: 75–84.
SharmaAMinh DucNTLuu Lam ThangT, et al.A consensus-based checklist for reporting of survey Studies (CROSS). J Gen Intern Med2021; 36: 3179–3187.
32.
ÖstholsSBoströmCRasmussen-BarrE. Clinical assessment and patient-reported outcome measures in low-back pain - a survey among primary health care physiotherapists. Disabil Rehabil2019; 41: 2459–2467.
33.
CopelandJMTaylorWJDeanSG. Factors influencing the use of outcome measures for patients with low back pain: a survey of New Zealand physical therapists. Phys Ther2008; 88: 1492–1505.
34.
KnoopJvan LankveldWGeerdinkFJB, et al.Use and perceived added value of patient-reported measurement instruments by physiotherapists treating acute low back pain: a survey study among Dutch physiotherapists. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2020; 21: 120.
35.
SwinkelsRAvan PeppenRPWittinkH, et al.Current use and barriers and facilitators for implementation of standardised measures in physical therapy in The Netherlands. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2011; 12: 106.
36.
KyteDIvesJDraperH, et al.Current practices in patient-reported outcome (PRO) data collection in clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey of UK trial staff and management. BMJ Open2016; 6: e012281.
37.
MeirteJHellemansNAnthonissenM, et al.Benefits and disadvantages of electronic patient-reported outcome measures: systematic review. JMIR Perioper Med2020; 3: e15588.
38.
O’ConnellSPalmerRWithersK, et al.Requirements for the collection of electronic PROMS either ‘in clinic’ or ‘at home’ as part of the PROMs, PREMs and Effectiveness Programme (PPEP) in Wales: a feasibility study using a generic PROM tool. Pilot Feasibility Stud2018; 4: 90.
39.
KleinlugtenbeltYVNienhuisRWBhandariM, et al.Are validated outcome measures used in distal radial fractures truly valid? A critical assessment using the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Bone Jt Res2016; 5: 153–161.
40.
MikiTKondoYTakebayashiT, et al.Difference between physical therapist estimation and psychological patient-reported outcome measures in patients with low back pain. PLOS ONE2020; 15: e0227999.
41.
StevensJGABeurskensAJMH. Implementation of measurement instruments in physical therapist practice: development of a tailored strategy. Phys Ther2010; 90: 953–961.
42.
DeshmukhSRKirkhamJJKarantanaA, et al.Developing a core outcome set for hand fractures and joint injuries in adults. Bone Jt Open2023; 4: 87–95.
43.
WoutersRMJobi-OdeneyeAOde la TorreA, et al.A standard set for outcome measurement in patients with hand and wrist conditions: consensus by the international consortium for health outcomes measurement hand and wrist working group. J Hand Surg2021; 46: 841–855.
