Search

Abstract Background The 30-item disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) questionnaire is increasingly used in clinical research involving upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders. From the original DASH a shorter version, the 11-item QuickDASH, has been developed. Little is known about the discriminant ability of score changes for the QuickDASH compared to the DASH. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the QuickDASH and its cross-sectional and longitudinal validity and reliability. Methods The study was based on extracting QuickDASH item responses from the responses to the full-length DASH questionnaire completed by 105 patients with a variety of upper extremity disorders before surgery and at follow-up 6 to 21 months after surgery. The DASH and QuickDASH scores were compared for the whole population and for different diagnostic groups. For longitudinal construct validity the effect size and standardized response mean were calculated. Analyses with ROC curves were performed to compare the ability of the DASH and QuickDASH to discriminate among patients classified according to the magnitude of self-rated improvement. Cross-sectional and test-retest reliability was assessed. Results The mean DASH score was 34 (SD 22) and the mean QuickDASH score was 39 (SD 24) at baseline. For the different diagnostic groups the mean and median QuickDASH scores were higher than the corresponding DASH scores. For the whole population, the mean difference between the QuickDASH and DASH baseline scores was 4.2 (95% CI 3.2–5.3), follow-up scores was 2.6 (1.7–3.4), and change scores was 1.7 (0.6–2.8). The overall effect size and standardized response mean measured with the DASH and the QuickDASH were similar. In the ROC analysis of change scores among patients who rated their arm status as somewhat or much better and those who rated it as unchanged the difference in the area under the ROC curve for the DASH and QuickDASH was 0.01 (95% CI -0.05–0.07) indicating similar discriminant ability. Cross-sectional and test-retest reliability of the DASH and QuickDASH were similar. Conclusion The results indicate that the QuickDASH can be used instead of the DASH with similar precision in upper extremity disorders.

Abstract Background The course of pain at a specific region such as the lower back has previously been shown as well as for generalized pain. However we have not found any report on the course of pain from various different specific regions. The aim of this investigation was to study the one-year transition of reported pain in different body locations. Methods From a general population 14555 men and women, 46–68 years, responded to an extensive health questionnaire including the standardized Nordic questionnaire. The population represented 27% of the total population within the age group in Malmö, Sweden. At the one year follow-up 12607 responded to the questionnaire, yielding a response rate of 87%. The one year prevalence of long-lasting pain and the pattern of pain reporting from different regions were studied for men and women. Results The one-year prevalence of long-lasting neck pain was 14% (95% CI 13–15) among men and 25% (95% CI 24–26) among women at baseline and 15% (95% CI 14–16) for the men and 23% (95% CI 22–24) for the women at follow-up. Of those reporting neck pain "all the time" at baseline, 48% of the men and 54% of the women also reported neck pain "all the time" at the one-year follow-up. At the follow-up neck pain was reported as present "often" by 43% of the men and 47% of the women who reported neck pain "often" at baseline. Similar transition pattern were found for neck, shoulders, elbow/wrist/hand and lower back symptoms, as well as consistent prevalence rates. Conclusion The one-year transition pattern of reported pain was similar in different body regions and among men and women. Furthermore the prevalence rates of long-lasting pain in the population were consistent at baseline and the follow-up. The findings of similar transition patterns support the interpretation of long-lasting pain as a generalized phenomenon rather than attributed to specific exposure. This may have implications for future pain research.

Abstract Background The disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) questionnaire is a self-administered region-specific outcome instrument developed as a measure of self-rated upper-extremity disability and symptoms. The DASH consists mainly of a 30-item disability/symptom scale, scored 0 (no disability) to 100. The main purpose of this study was to assess the longitudinal construct validity of the DASH among patients undergoing surgery. The second purpose was to quantify self-rated treatment effectiveness after surgery. Methods The longitudinal construct validity of the DASH was evaluated in 109 patients having surgical treatment for a variety of upper-extremity conditions, by assessing preoperative-to-postoperative (6–21 months) change in DASH score and calculating the effect size and standardized response mean. The magnitude of score change was also analyzed in relation to patients' responses to an item regarding self-perceived change in the status of the arm after surgery. Performance of the DASH as a measure of treatment effectiveness was assessed after surgery for subacromial impingement and carpal tunnel syndrome by calculating the effect size and standardized response mean. Results Among the 109 patients, the mean (SD) DASH score preoperatively was 35 (22) and postoperatively 24 (23) and the mean score change was 15 (13). The effect size was 0.7 and the standardized response mean 1.2. The mean change (95% confidence interval) in DASH score for the patients reporting the status of the arm as "much better" or "much worse" after surgery was 19 (15–23) and for those reporting it as "somewhat better" or "somewhat worse" was 10 (7–14) (p = 0.01). In measuring effectiveness of arthroscopic acromioplasty the effect size was 0.9 and standardized response mean 0.5; for carpal tunnel surgery the effect size was 0.7 and standardized response mean 1.0. Conclusion The DASH can detect and differentiate small and large changes of disability over time after surgery in patients with upper-extremity musculoskeletal disorders. A 10-point difference in mean DASH score may be considered as a minimal important change. The DASH can show treatment effectiveness after surgery for subacromial impingement and carpal tunnel syndrome. The effect size and standardized response mean may yield substantially differing results.

Abstract Background Numerous nerve conduction tests are used for the electrodiagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), with a wide range of sensitivity and specificity reported for each test in clinical studies. The tests have not been assessed in population-based studies. Such information would be important when using electrodiagnosis in epidemiologic research. The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of various nerve conduction tests in population-based CTS and determine the properties of the most accurate test. Methods In a population-based study a questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 3,000 persons. Of 2,466 responders, 262 symptomatic (numbness/tingling in the radial fingers) and 125 randomly selected asymptomatic responders underwent clinical and electrophysiologic examinations. A standardized hand diagram was administered to the symptomatic persons. At the clinical examination, the examining surgeon identified 94 symptomatic persons as having clinically certain CTS. Nerve conduction tests were then performed on the symptomatic and the asymptomatic persons by blinded examiners. Analysis with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves was used to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the nerve conduction tests in distinguishing the persons with clinically certain CTS from the asymptomatic persons. Results No difference was shown in the diagnostic accuracy of median nerve distal motor latency, digit-wrist sensory latency, wrist-palm sensory conduction velocity, and wrist-palm/forearm sensory conduction velocity ratio (area under curve, 0.75–0.76). Median-ulnar digit-wrist sensory latency difference had a significantly higher diagnostic accuracy (area under curve, 0.80). Using the optimal cutoff value of 0.8 ms for abnormal sensory latency difference shown on the ROC curve the sensitivity was 70%, specificity 82%, positive predictive value 19% and negative predictive value 98%. Based on the clinical diagnosis among the symptomatic persons, the hand diagram (classified as classic/probable or possible/unlikely CTS) had high sensitivity but poor specificity. Conclusions Using the clinical diagnosis of CTS as the criterion standard, nerve conduction tests had moderate sensitivity and specificity and a low positive predictive value in population-based CTS. Measurement of median-ulnar sensory latency difference had the highest diagnostic accuracy. The performance of nerve conduction tests in population-based CTS does not necessarily apply to their performance in clinical settings.

Abstract Background Little work has been done to investigate the suggestion that the use of selected scales from a multi-scale health-status questionnaire would compromise reliability and validity. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of three scales selected from the SF-36 generic health questionnaire when administered in isolation or within the entire SF-36 to patients with musculoskeletal disorders. Methods Two groups of patients referred to an orthopedic department completed a mailed questionnaire within 4 weeks prior to and a second questionnaire during their visit. The first group completed three SF-36 scales related to physical health (physical functioning, bodily pain, and general health perceptions) on one occasion and all eight SF-36 scales on the other occasion. The second group completed the entire SF-36 on two occasions. Results for patients who reported unchanged health status and had complete scores were analyzed; 80 patients in the first and 62 patients in the second group. Results The Cronbach alpha reliability and intraclass correlation coefficients exceeded 0.7 for all three scales for both groups. For the first group the mean difference between the scores was 0.4 point for physical functioning, 2.5 points for bodily pain, and 0.5 point for general health perceptions, which did not differ significantly from the corresponding differences for the second group (0.1, 1.9 and 1 point, respectively). Conclusion The use of selected scales from a multi-scale health-status questionnaire seems to yield similar results compared to their use within the entire questionnaire.