Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery
Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 2/2014

01-02-2014 | Trauma Surgery

Recommendation for measuring clinical outcome in distal radius fractures: a core set of domains for standardized reporting in clinical practice and research

Authors: Jörg Goldhahn, Dorcas Beaton, Amy Ladd, Joy Macdermid, Amy Hoang-Kim

Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Issue 2/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Lack of standardization of outcome measurement has hampered an evidence-based approach to clinical practice and research.

Methods

We adopted a process of reviewing evidence on current use of measures and appropriate theoretical frameworks for health and disability to inform a consensus process that was focused on deriving the minimal set of core domains in distal radius fracture.

Results

We agreed on the following seven core recommendations: (1) pain and function were regarded as the primary domains, (2) very brief measures were needed for routine administration in clinical practice, (3) these brief measures could be augmented by additional measures that provide more detail or address additional domains for clinical research, (4) measurement of pain should include measures of both intensity and frequency as core attributes, (5) a numeric pain scale, e.g. visual analogue scale or visual numeric scale or the pain subscale of the patient-reported wrist evaluation (PRWE) questionnaires were identified as reliable, valid and feasible measures to measure these concepts, (6) for function, either the Quick Disability of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire or PRWE-function subscale was identified as reliable, valid and feasible measures, and (7) a measure of participation and treatment complications should be considered core outcomes for both clinical practice and research.

Conclusion

We used a sound methodological approach to form a comprehensive foundation of content for outcomes in the area of distal radius fractures. We recommend the use of symptom and function as separate domains in the ICF core set in clinical research or practice for patients with wrist fracture. Further research is needed to provide more definitive measurement properties of measures across all domains.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
Abraham A, Handoll HH, Khan T (2008) Interventions for treating wrist fractures in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD004576PubMed
3.
4.
Beaton DE, Wright JG, Katz JN (2005) Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three-item reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:1038–1046PubMedCrossRef
5.
Bellamy N, Kirwan J, Boers M et al (1997) Recommendations for a core set of outcome measures for future phase II clinical trials in knee, hip and hand osteoarthritis. Consensus development at OMERACT III. J Rhematol 24:799–802
6.
7.
Cieza A, Ewert T, Ustün TB et al (2004) Development of ICF core sets for patients with chronic conditions. J Rehabil Med 36(suppl 44):9–11
8.
Coenen M, Cieza A, Freeman J et al (2011) Members of the consensus conference. The development of ICF Core Sets for multiple sclerosis: results of the international consensus conference. J Neurol 258:1477–1488PubMedCrossRef
9.
Finger ME, Escorpizio R, Glässel A et al (2011) ICF core set for vocational rehabilitation: results of an international consensus conference. Disabil Rehabil 34(5):429–438PubMedCrossRef
10.
Goldhahn J, Angst F, Simmen BR (2008) What counts: outcome assessment after distal radius fractures in aged patients. J Orthop Trauma 22:S126–S130PubMedCrossRef
11.
Green DP, O’Brien ET (1978) Open reduction of carpal dislocations: indications and operative techniques. J Hand Surg 3:250–265CrossRef
12.
Handoll HH, Madhok R, Howe TE (2006) Rehabilitation for distal radial fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD003324PubMed
13.
Hoang-Kim A (2010) The first international society for fracture repair and international osteoporosis foundation “osteoporosis: from evidence to action” combined symposium and working groups. Adv Orthop 2:15–18
14.
Hoang-Kim A, Scott J, Micera G et al (2009) Functional assessment in patients with osteoporotic wrist fractures treated with external fixation: a review of randomized trials. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 129:105–111PubMedCrossRef
15.
Hoang-Kim A, Pegreffi F, Moroni A, Ladd A (2011) Measuring wrist and hand function: common scales and checklists. Injury 42:253–258PubMedCrossRef
16.
Hodsman AB, Leslie WD, Tsang JF, Gamble GD (2008) 10-year probability of recurrent fractures following wrist and other osteoporotic fractures in a large clinical cohort: an analysis from the manitoba bone density program. Arch Intern Med 10(168):2261–2267CrossRef
17.
18.
19.
20.
Kennedy CA, Beaton DE, Solway S et al (2011) The DASH and QuickDASH outcome measures user’s manual, 3rd edn. Institute for Work and Health, Toronto
21.
Kotsis SV, Lau FH, Chung KC (2007) Responsiveness of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire and physical measurements in outcome studies of distal radius fracture treatment. J Hand Surg 32:84–90CrossRef
22.
Lips P, Jameson K, Bianchi ML et al (2010) Validation of the IOF quality of life questionnaire for patients with wrist fracture. Osteo Int 21:61–70CrossRef
23.
Lohr KN, Aaronson NK, Alonso J et al (1996) Evaluating quality-of-life and health status instruments: development of scientific review criteria. Clin Ther 18:979–992PubMedCrossRef
24.
MacDermid JC, Tottenham V (2004) Responsiveness of the disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) and patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation (PRWHE) in evaluating change after hand therapy. J Hand Ther 17:18–23PubMedCrossRef
25.
McKay SD, MacDermid JC, Roth JH, Richards RS (2001) Assessment of complications of distal radius fractures and development of a complication checklist. J Hand Surg Am 26(5):916–922PubMedCrossRef
26.
Michlovitz SL, LaStayo PC, Alzner S, Watson E (2001) Distal radius fractures: therapy practice patterns. J Hand Ther 14:249–257PubMedCrossRef
27.
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL et al (2010) The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 63:737–745PubMedCrossRef
28.
Riddle DL, Stratford PW, Singh JA et al (2009) Variation in outcome measures in hip and knee arthroplasty clinical trials: a proposed approach to achieving consensus. J Rheum 36:2050–2056PubMedCrossRef
29.
Shauver MJ, Yin H, Banerjee M et al (2011) Current and future national costs to medicare for the treatment of distal radius fracture in the elderly. J Hand Surg 36:1282–1287CrossRef
30.
Stucki G, Grimby G (2004) Foreword: applying the ICF in medicine. J Rehabil Med 36:5–6CrossRef
31.
Tugwell P, Boers M (1993) OMERACT conference on outcome measures in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials: conclusion. J Rheum 20:590
32.
33.
Vannabouathong C, Sprague S, Bhandari M (2011) Guidelines for fracture healing assessments in clinical trials. Part I: definitions and endpoint committees. Injury 42:314–316PubMedCrossRef
34.
Williamson PR, Altman D, Blazeby J et al (2012) Driving up the quality and relevance of research through the use of agreed core outcomes. J Health Serv Res Policy 17:1–2PubMedCrossRef
35.
World Health Organization (2001) International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Switzerland, Geneva, pp 10–20
Metadata
Title
Recommendation for measuring clinical outcome in distal radius fractures: a core set of domains for standardized reporting in clinical practice and research
Authors
Jörg Goldhahn
Dorcas Beaton
Amy Ladd
Joy Macdermid
Amy Hoang-Kim
Publication date
01-02-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Electronic ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-013-1767-9

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 2/2014 Go to the issue

Osteoporotic Fracture Management

Anti-osteoporosis therapy and fracture healing

Trauma Surgery

Strategies used by an osteoporosis patient group to navigate for bone health care after a fracture

Orthopaedic Surgery

Artificial total disc replacement versus fusion for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Osteoporotic Fracture Management

How to document and report orthopedic complications in clinical studies? A proposal for standardization

Orthopaedic Surgery

Pregnancy-associated osteoporosis with eight fractures in the vertebral column treated with kyphoplasty and bracing: a case report

Trauma Surgery

Understanding osteoporosis and fractures: an introduction to the use of qualitative research