Correlation of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Questionnaires With the Brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire in Patients With 5 Common Hand Conditions

Anatomic Variation of the Hamate Hook as a Potential Risk in Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release

“…Spearman’s correlation coefficients facilitated the analysis of correlations between the HH or the HH/HT ratio, the carpal tunnel’s CSA, postoperative nerve conduction velocity, VAS, Quick DASH, and the BCTQ FSS, and SSS. The correlation strength was categorized as follows 15 : very strong (absolute value, ≥0.8), strong (absolute value, 0.60–0.79), moderate (absolute value, 0.40–0.59), weak (absolute value, 0.20–0.39), and very weak (absolute value, 0.00–0.19). The incidence of complications was compared between cases with and without a hypoplastic hook using Fisher’s exact test.…”

Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement and Minimal Clinically Important Difference for Hand Surgeons

“…The psychometric properties of the PROMIS UE and PF CATs when compared with the widely used DASH instrument compare favorably and with good correlation and reliability. 12 When comparing PROMIS UE and PI CATs with the brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire (bMHQ), good correlations were found, with one study by Shetty et al 20 noting that the PROMIS instruments are likely adequate replacements for patients with five common hand conditions studied.…”

Key considerations to reduce or address respondent burden in patient-reported outcome (PRO) data collection

“…The need for clearly defined research objective(s) for PRO data collection, which should inform the selection of the most appropriate PROMs, was highlighted by Shetty et al 20 . It was also recommended that the formulation of these objectives and subsequent selection of measures should consider patients’ physical and mental capacity and potential respondent burden 20 , 21 . The collection of PRO data for trials as well as routine care should be evidence-informed to ensure that the data collection justifies the burden and potential risks 22 , 23 .…”

“…Key considerations include: Having a clearly defined rationale in terms of research objective(s) for PRO data collection should inform the selection of the most appropriate PROMs 20 , 21 . Capturing outcomes that matter to the patient population and involving patients in the selection of measures may mean respondents are willing to complete lengthier measures 10 , 11 , 22 , 42 .…”

“…Having a clearly defined rationale in terms of research objective(s) for PRO data collection should inform the selection of the most appropriate PROMs 20 , 21 .…”