Reconstruction of Partial Hypopharyngeal Defects following Total Laryngectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Various operative techniques exist to reconstruct partial hypopharyngeal defects following total laryngectomy. The current study aimed to investigate and compare complications and functional results following commonly used reconstructive techniques. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed using studies that investigated outcomes after the reconstruction of a partial hypopharyngeal defect. The outcomes of interest were fistulas, strictures, flap failure, swallowing function and postoperative speech. RESULTS: Of the 4035 studies identified, 23 were included in this review. Four common reconstructive techniques were reported, with a total of 794 patients: (1) pectoralis major myocutaneous and (2) myofascial flap, (3) anterolateral thigh free flap and (4) radial forearm free flap. Fistulas occurred significantly more often than pectoralis major myocutaneous flaps (34%, 95% CI 23-47%) compared with other flaps (p < 0.001). No significant differences in the rates of strictures or flap failure were observed. Pectoralis major myofascial flaps were non-inferior to free-flap reconstructions. Insufficient data were available to assess speech results between flap types. CONCLUSION: Pectoralis myocutaneous flaps should not be the preferred method of reconstruction for most patients, considering their significantly higher rate of fistulas. In contrast, pectoralis major myofascial flaps yield promising results compared to free-flap reconstructions, warranting further investigation.

Surgical Techniques in Non-Traumatic Midcarpal Instability: Evaluating the Dorsal Capsulodesis and Three-Ligament Tenodesis Technique.

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of midcarpal instability (MCI), also referred to as carpal instability nondissociative, remains controversial due to limited evidence on different techniques. This study aimed to assess and compare differences in patient-reported pain, hand and wrist function, patient satisfaction, range of motion, and return to work in patients with non-traumatic MCI who underwent surgical treatment either through dorsal wrist capsulodesis or three-ligament tenodesis (3LT). METHODS: Patients with MCI and persisting complaints after conservative therapy treated with 3LT or dorsal capsulodesis were included. Patients with posttraumatic instability were excluded. Primary endpoints included the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) and Satisfaction with Treatment Result Questionnaire at 12 months postoperative. All data were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients treated with dorsal capsulodesis and 21 treated with 3LT between December 2011 and December 2019 were included. At twelve months postoperative, both treatment groups reported significant improvements in pain and function scores. However, at three months postoperative, the dorsal capsulodesis group exhibited significantly better outcomes, followed by a greater return to work (72%) compared to the 3LT group (50%). However, the capsulodesis group demonstrated a decreased range of motion at three months which was restored at 12 months postoperative. No significant difference in satisfaction with treatment was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Both 3LT and dorsal capsulodesis demonstrate promising results for addressing non-traumatic MCI. However, considering the quicker recovery and faster return to work associated with dorsal capsulodesis, we recommend favoring capsulodesis over 3LT when both surgical options are deemed suitable for the patient. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Recurrence rate and patient-reported outcomes after wedge excision of carpal boss.

The treatment of carpal boss is primarily conservative. Surgical treatment by performing a wedge excision of the bony protrusion, is possible. However, a common belief exists that carpal boss should not be operated because of the high recurrence rate. Additionally, little is known about the clinical outcomes of wedge excision and the preferred post-operative treatment. Patients with carpal boss and persisting pain who underwent wedge excision after conservative treatment were included. They received questionnaires before and three months after surgery. The primary outcomes were pain and hand function measured using patient-reported wrist evaluations (PRWE). Secondarily, recurrence, patient satisfaction and time until return to work were evaluated. These clinical outcomes were also compared between patients who received a plaster splint or a pressure dressing post-operatively. 76 patients were included. Three months after surgery, a significant improvement in PRWE was seen, for both pain and function. A re-operation rate for recurrent carpal boss of 13% was observed. After three months, 58% of patients were satisfied and 73% had returned to work. While no differences in clinical outcomes were found, patients were more satisfied after receiving a pressure dressing than a plaster splint post-operatively. The current study demonstrates encouraging early outcomes after wedge excision, and a low recurrence re-operation rate. Furthermore, a pressure dressing seems preferable post-operatively compared to a plaster splint.

Clinical outcomes after primary repair for thumb ulnar collateral ligament ruptures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

There is no consensus on the best surgical technique for treating thumb ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) ruptures. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates which primary repair technique and postoperative immobilization protocol result in the best clinical outcomes. A literature search was conducted in Embase, Medline ALL Ovid, Web of Science Core Selection and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Pain, stability, tip pinch strength, key pinch strength, grip strength, return to work and metacarpophalangeal joint range of motion were collected as postoperative outcomes. In total, 29 studies were included. All surgical techniques resulted in satisfactory clinical outcomes, with no significant differences between bone anchor reinsertion, suture fixation, K-wire fixation and a combination of techniques. K-wire immobilization resulted in worse postoperative pain, but similar stability compared to immobilization without a K-wire. Clinical outcomes after thumb UCL repair are excellent, with no differences in clinical outcomes noted among surgical techniques.

Reconstruction of an early stage SLAC wrist with the 3-LT procedure: A controversial reappraisal.

OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that the three-ligament tenodesis (3-LT) procedure is still sufficient - even in scapholunate advanced collapse (SLAC) cases - to reduce pain and improve wrist function. We compared patient-reported outcomes of scapholunate interosseus ligament (SLIL) injury patients with SLAC to SLIL injury patients treated with 3-LT, and then to patients who received proximal row carpectomy (PRC), as a control group. METHOD: We included all patients with a traumatic SLIL injury and associated SLAC components treated with 3-LT and completed Patient Reported Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) questionnaires preoperative and at 12 months follow-up. First, we compared matched patients with SLIL injury and SLIL injury with SLAC, stage 1-3, who received 3-LT. Second, we compared patients who received 3-LT, with patients who underwent PRC, while having SLAC stage 2-3. RESULTS: We compared 51 patients with SLAC to 95 with SLIL injury who had a 3-LT procedure, and 10 3-LT patients were compared to 18 patients undergoing PRC, given SLAC 2-3. In both analyses, the PRWE scores had significantly improved in all groups, however no significant differences in PRWE were found between 3-LT in SLIL injury and SLIL injury with SLAC, 6.9 points (95% CI [-14.92; 1.22], p = 0.096) and between 3-LT and PRC, given SLAC stage 2-3, 15.1 points (not enough power). CONCLUSION: There is no difference in PRWE between matched SLIL injury patients with or without degenerative changes treated with a 3-LT. Therefore, the 3-LT procedure seems to be a viable treatment option for patients with early-stage SLAC wrist. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic III.

Preoperative indicators of the effectiveness of surgical release in de Quervain patients: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of patients still report pain following a surgical release for de Quervain disease (DQ). This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a surgical release for DQ and to identify the preoperative factors associated with pain after a surgical release for DQ. METHODS: This prospective cohort study includes 707 patients who underwent a surgical release and completed the Visual Analog Scale Questionnaire (VAS, range 0-100). We used a paired t-test to analyse the effectiveness of the surgical release on pain at three months post-operatively compared to the pre-operatively measured outcome. A hierarchical multivariable linear regression model was created to investigate the contribution of the patient- and disease characteristics to post-operative pain. RESULTS: All VAS domains showed improvement after surgical release. On average, the mean VAS pain decreased by 44 points (95% CI 42; 46). Smoking (B=6.37; p<0.01), younger age (B=-0.35; p<0.01), longer duration of complaints (B=0.13; p<0.01), concomitant surgery (B=14.40; p<0.01) and higher VAS pain scores at intake (B=0.15; p<0.01) were associated with worse VAS pain scores post-operatively. Together, the variables explained 11% of the variance in mean VAS pain score at three months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that surgical treatment for patients with DQ significantly reduces patient-reported pain. Smoking, younger age, concomitant surgery, duration of complaints, and higher VAS pain scores at intake are associated with worse patient-reported pain three months after surgical release. However, the small effects suggest that these factors should not be considered the only important factors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.

Versatility of the double fascicular transfer in reconstruction of elbow flexion paralysis: Intermediate term follow-up and patient-related outcome measures.

OBJECTIVES: The use of fascicle transfers in the reconstruction of traumatic brachial plexus injury is well established, but limited evidence is available regarding their use in atraumatic elbow flexion paralysis. This retrospective case review aimed to verify whether median and ulnar fascicle transfers are similarly effective in atraumatic versus traumatic elbow flexion paralysis when measured using the British Medical Research Council (MRC) scale, Brachial plexus Assessment Tool (BrAT) and Stanmore Percentage of Normal Elbow Assessment (SPONEA) scores at long-term follow-up. METHODS: All median and ulnar fascicle transfer cases performed at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham between August 2007 and November 2018 were reviewed to compare the outcomes of transfers performed for traumatic and atraumatic indications. Data on patient demographics, mechanism and nature of injury, date of injury or symptom onset, date of operation, and other nerve transfers performed were collected. Outcome measures collected included the British MRC scale and two patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), BrAT and SPONEA. RESULTS: In total, 34 patients with 45 median and ulnar fascicle transfers were identified. This included 27 traumatic and seven atraumatic brachial plexus insults. Thirty patients had sufficient follow-up to be included in MRC analysis and 17 patients had sufficient follow-up to be included in PROM analysis. No significant differences were found between traumatic and atraumatic subgroups for median MRC, BrAT, or SPONEA scores. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that nerve transfers might be considered effective reconstructive options in atraumatic pathology and provides validation for further research on the subject.

Changes in illness perception, pain catastrophizing, and psychological distress following hand surgeon consultation: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Baseline mindset factors are important factors that influence treatment decisions and outcomes. Theoretically, improving the mindset prior to treatment may improve treatment decisions and outcomes. This prospective cohort study evaluated changes in patients' mindset following hand surgeon consultation. Additionally, we assessed if the change in illness perception differed between surgical and nonsurgical patients. METHODS: The primary outcome was illness perception, measured using the total score of the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (B-IPQ, range 0-80). Secondary outcomes were the B-IPQ subscales, pain catastrophizing (measured using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)), and psychological distress (measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire-4). RESULTS: A total of 276 patients with various hand and wrist conditions completed the mindset questionnaires before and after hand surgeon consultation (median time interval: 15 days). The B-IPQ total score improved from 39.7 (±10.6) before to 35.8 (±11.3) after consultation (p < 0.0001, Cohen's d = 0.36); scores also improved for the B-IPQ subscales Coherence, Concern, Emotional Response, Timeline, Treatment Control, and Identity and the PCS. There were no changes in the other outcomes. Surgical patients improved on the B-IPQ subscales Treatment Control and Timeline, while nonsurgical patients did not. CONCLUSIONS: Illness perception and pain catastrophizing improved following hand surgeon consultation, suggesting that clinicians may actively influence the patients' mindset during consultations, and that they may try to enhance this effect to improve outcomes. Furthermore, surgical patients improved more in illness perceptions, indicating that nonsurgical patients may benefit from a more targeted strategy for changing mindset.

The Ultrashort Mental Health Screening Tool Is a Valid and Reliable Measure With Added Value to Support Decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Mental health influences symptoms, outcomes, and decision-making in musculoskeletal healthcare. Implementing measures of mental health in clinical practice can be challenging. An ultrashort screening tool for mental health with a low burden is currently unavailable but could be used as a conversation starter, expectation management tool, or decision support tool. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Which items of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4), and Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (B-IPQ) are the most discriminative and yield a high correlation with the total scores of these questionnaires? (2) What is the construct validity and added clinical value (explained variance for pain and hand function) of an ultrashort four-item mental health screening tool? (3) What is the test-retest reliability of the screening tool? (4) What is the response time for the ultrashort screening tool? METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study. Data collection was part of usual care at Xpert Clinics, the Netherlands, but prospective measurements were added to this study. Between September 2017 and January 2022, we included 19,156 patients with hand and wrist conditions. We subdivided these into four samples: a test set to select the screener items (n = 18,034), a validation set to determine whether the selected items were solid (n = 1017), a sample to determine the added clinical value (explained variance for pain and hand function, n = 13,061), and a sample to assess the test-retest reliability (n = 105). Patients were eligible for either sample if they completed all relevant measurements of interest for that particular sample. To create an ultrashort screening tool that is valid, reliable, and has added value, we began by picking the most discriminatory items (that is, the items that were most influential for determining the total score) from the PCS, PHQ-4, and B-IPQ using chi-square automated interaction detection (a machine-learning algorithm). To assess construct validity (how well our screening tool assesses the constructs of interest), we correlated these items with the associated sum score of the full questionnaire in the test and validation sets. We compared the explained variance of linear models for pain and function using the screening tool items or the original sum scores of the PCS, PHQ-4, and B-IPQ to further assess the screening tool's construct validity and added value. We evaluated test-retest reliability by calculating weighted kappas, ICCs, and the standard error of measurement. RESULTS: We identified four items and used these in the screening tool. The screening tool items were highly correlated with the PCS (Pearson coefficient = 0.82; p < 0.001), PHQ-4 (0.87; p < 0.001), and B-IPQ (0.85; p < 0.001) sum scores, indicating high construct validity. The full questionnaires explained only slightly more variance in pain and function (10% to 22%) than the screening tool did (9% to 17%), again indicating high construct validity and much added clinical value of the screening tool. Test-retest reliability was high for the PCS (ICC 0.75, weighted kappa 0.75) and B-IPQ (ICC 0.70 to 0.75, standard error of measurement 1.3 to 1.4) items and moderate for the PHQ-4 item (ICC 0.54, weighted kappa 0.54). The median response time was 43 seconds, against more than 4 minutes for the full questionnaires. CONCLUSION: Our ultrashort, valid, and reliable screening tool for pain catastrophizing, psychologic distress, and illness perception can be used before clinician consultation and may serve as a conversation starter, an expectation management tool, or a decision support tool. The clinical utility of the screening tool is that it can indicate that further testing is warranted, guide a clinician when considering a consultation with a mental health specialist, or support a clinician in choosing between more invasive and less invasive treatments. Future studies could investigate how the tool can be used optimally and whether using the screening tool affects daily clinic decisions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, diagnostic study.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Function After Surgical Repair of the Ulnar Collateral Ligament of the Thumb.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report prospectively collected patient-reported outcomes of patients who underwent open thumb ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) repair and to find risk factors associated with poor patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: Patients undergoing open surgical repair for a complete thumb UCL rupture were included between December 2011 and February 2021. Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) total scores at baseline were compared to MHQ total scores at three and 12 months after surgery. Associations between the 12-month MHQ total score and several variables (i.e., sex, injury to surgery time, K-wire immobilization) were analyzed. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients were included. From baseline to three and 12 months after surgery, patients improved significantly with a mean MHQ total score of 65 (standard deviation [SD] 15) to 78 (SD 14) and 87 (SD 12), respectively. We did not find any differences in outcomes between patients who underwent surgery in the acute (<3 weeks) setting compared to a delayed setting (<6 months). CONCLUSIONS: We found that patient-reported outcomes improve significantly at three and 12 months after open surgical repair of the thumb UCL compared to baseline. We did not find an association between injury to surgery time and lower MHQ total scores. This suggests that acute repair for full-thickness UCL tears might not always be necessary. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.

Prevalence of Complications and Association With Patient-Reported Outcomes After Trapeziectomy With a Weilby Sling: A Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The primary aim of this study was to report complications during the first year after trapeziectomy with Weilby sling using a standardized tool designed by the International Consortium for Health Outcome Measures. The secondary aim was to determine the association of complications and patient-reported outcomes 12 months after surgery. METHODS: We included patients who underwent trapeziectomy with Weilby sling between November 2013 and December 2018. All complications during the first year were scored using the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Complications in Hand and Wrist conditions (ICHAW) tool. Pain and hand function were measured before surgery and 12 months after surgery using the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ). Minimally Important Change thresholds of 18.6 for MHQ pain and 9.4 for MHQ function were used to determine clinical importance. RESULTS: Of 531 patients after trapeziectomy with Weilby sling, 65% had an uneventful recovery, 16% experienced ICHAW Grade 1 deviations only, and 19% experienced Grade 2 or 3 deviations, including requiring antibiotics, corticosteroid injections, or additional surgery. On average, patients improved in pain and hand function, even in the presence of ICHAW events. Although all ICHAW grades were associated with poorer patient-reported outcomes 12 months after surgery, Grade 2 and 3 exceeded the Minimally Important Change threshold for pain and/or function. CONCLUSIONS: In 531 patients, 65% had an uneventful recovery, 16% experienced ICHAW Grade 1 deviations only, and 19% experienced grade 2 or 3 deviations. We recommend describing Grade 1 as "adverse protocol deviations" and grade 2 and 3 as complications, because of clinically relevant poorer patient-reported outcomes 12 months after surgery. The ICHAW is a promising tool to evaluate systematically and compare complications in hand surgery, although we recommend further evaluation. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Treatment Invasiveness and Illness Perceptions Are Strongly Associated With Outcome Expectations in Patients Treated for Hand or Wrist Conditions: A Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Multiple studies have shown that more-positive outcome expectations are associated with better treatment outcomes. Although this has not been shown to represent a causal relationship, there nonetheless is an interest in positively modifying outcome expectations to improve treatment outcomes. However, little is known about what is independently associated with outcome expectations in clinical practice. For example, it is unknown to what extent expectations are associated with treatment or patient characteristics such as sociodemographics or with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) on patient perceptions of physical or mental health or illness. Studying factors associated with outcome expectations may provide relevant information for clinicians and researchers aiming to improve outcome expectations. Improving expectations might, in turn, improve treatment outcomes. QUESTION/PURPOSE: Which factors (that is, sociodemographics, PROMs, illness perceptions, treatment, surgeon, and location) are independently associated with outcome expectations in patients with hand or wrist conditions? METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Between July 2018 and December 2021, we screened 21,327 patients with a diagnosed hand or wrist condition with complete baseline sociodemographic data such as age and workload. Sixty percent (12,765 of 21,327) of patients completed all relevant PROMs. We excluded patients receiving rare treatments, leaving 58% (12,345 of 21,327) for inclusion in the final sample. Those who participated were more often scheduled for surgical treatment and had higher expectations. We performed a multilevel analysis involving two steps. First, we evaluated whether patients receiving the same treatment, being counseled by the same surgeon, or being treated at the same location have more similar outcome expectations. We found that only patients receiving the same treatment had more similar outcome expectations. Therefore, we used a multilevel regression model to account for this correlation within treatments, and added treatment characteristics (such as nonsurgical versus minor or major surgery) to potential explanatory factors. Second, in the multilevel hierarchical regression analysis, we added sociodemographics (Model 1), PROMs for physical and mental health (Model 2), illness perceptions (Model 3), and treatment characteristics (most-definitive model) to assess the explained variance in outcome expectations per step and the relative association with outcome expectations. RESULTS: Sociodemographic factors such as age and workload explained 1% of the variance in outcome expectations. An additional 2% was explained by baseline PROMs for physical and mental health, 9% by illness perceptions, and 18% by treatment characteristics, resulting in an explained variance of 29% of the most-definitive model. A large number of patient and treatment characteristics were associated with outcome expectations. We used standardized betas to compare the magnitude of the effect of the different continuous and categorical variables. Among the associated variables, minor surgery (standardized beta [ß] = 0.56 [95% confidence interval 0.44 to 0.68]; p < 0.001) and major surgery (ß = 0.61 [95% CI 0.49 to 0.73]; p < 0.001) had the strongest positive association with outcome expectations (receiving surgery is associated with higher outcome expectations than nonsurgical treatment). A longer illness duration expected by the patient (-0.23 [95% CI -0.24 to -0.21]; p < 0.001) and being treated for the same condition as before (-0.08 [95% CI -0.14 to -0.03]; p = 0.003) had the strongest negative association with outcome expectations. CONCLUSION: Outcome expectations are mainly associated with the invasiveness of the treatment and by patients' illness perceptions; patients before surgical treatment have more positive expectations of the treatment outcome than patients before nonsurgical treatment, even after accounting for differences in clinical and psychosocial profiles. In addition, patients with a more-positive perception of their illness had more-positive expectations of their treatment. Our findings suggest expectation management should be tailored to the specific treatment (such as surgical versus nonsurgical) and the specific patient (including their perception of their illness). It may be more beneficial to test and implement expectation management strategies for nonsurgical treatments such as physical therapy than for surgical treatments, given that our findings indicate a greater need to do so. An additional advantage of such a strategy is that successful interventions may prevent converting to surgical interventions, which is a goal of the stepped-care principles of standard care. Future studies might investigate the causality of the association between pretreatment expectations and outcomes by performing an experimental study such as a randomized controlled trial, in which boosting expectations is compared with usual care in nonsurgical and surgical groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study.

Involvement in a Personal Injury Claim Is Associated With More Pain and Delayed Return to Work After Elective Nonsurgical or Surgical Treatment for Hand or Wrist Disorders: A Propensity Score-matched Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: A small proportion of patients treated for a hand or wrist condition are also involved in a personal injury claim that may or may not be related to the reason for seeking treatment. There are already indications that patients involved in a personal injury claim have more severe symptoms preoperatively and worse surgical outcomes. However, for nonsurgical treatment, it is unknown whether involvement in a personal injury claim affects treatment outcomes. Similarly, it is unknown whether treatment invasiveness affects the association between involvement in a personal injury claim and the outcomes of nonsurgical treatment. Finally, most studies did not take preoperative differences into account. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do patients with a claim have more pain during loading, less function, and longer time to return to work after nonsurgical treatment than matched patients without a personal injury claim? (2) Do patients with a personal injury claim have more pain, less function, and longer time to return to work after minor surgery than matched patients without a personal injury claim? (3) Do patients with a personal injury claim have more pain, less function, and longer time to return to work after major surgery than matched patients without a personal injury claim? METHODS: We used data from a longitudinally maintained database of patients treated for hand or wrist disorders in the Netherlands between December 2012 and May 2020. During the study period, 35,749 patients for whom involvement in a personal injury claim was known were treated nonsurgically or surgically for hand or wrist disorders. All patients were invited to complete the VAS (scores range from 0 to 100) for pain and hand function before treatment and at follow-up. We excluded patients who did not complete the VAS on pain and hand function before treatment and those who received a rare treatment, which we defined as fewer than 20 occurrences in our dataset, resulting in 29,101 patients who were eligible for evaluation in this study. Employed patients (66% [19,134 of 29,101]) were also asked to complete a questionnaire regarding return to work. We distinguished among nonsurgical treatment (follow-up at 3 months), minor surgery (such as trigger finger release, with follow-up of 3 months), and major surgery (such as trapeziectomy, with follow-up at 12 months). The mean age was 53 ± 15 years, 64% (18,695 of 29,101) were women, and 2% (651 of 29,101) of all patients were involved in a personal injury claim. For each outcome and treatment type, patients with a personal injury claim were matched to similar patients without a personal injury claim using 1:2 propensity score matching to account for differences in patient characteristics and baseline pain and hand function. For nonsurgical treatment VAS analysis, there were 115 personal injury claim patients and 230 matched control patients, and for return to work analysis, there were 83 claim and 166 control patients. For minor surgery VAS analysis, there were 172 personal injury claim patients and 344 matched control patients, and for return to work analysis, there were 108 claim and 216 control patients. For major surgery VAS analysis, there were 129 personal injury claim patients and 258 matched control patients, and for return to work analysis, there were 117 claim and 234 control patients. RESULTS: For patients treated nonsurgically, those with a claim had more pain during load at 3 months than matched patients without a personal injury claim (49 ± 30 versus 39 ± 30, adjusted mean difference 9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2 to 15]; p = 0.008), but there was no difference in hand function (61 ± 27 versus 66 ± 28, adjusted mean difference -5 [95% CI -11 to 1]; p = 0.11). Each week, patients with a personal injury claim had a 39% lower probability of returning to work than patients without a claim (HR 0.61 [95% CI 0.45 to 0.84]; p = 0.002). For patients with an injury claim at 3 months after minor surgery, there was more pain (44 ± 30 versus 34 ± 29, adjusted mean difference 10 [95% CI 5 to 15]; p < 0.001), lower function (60 ± 28 versus 69 ± 28, adjusted mean difference -9 [95% CI -14 to -4]; p = 0.001), and 32% lower probability of returning to work each week (HR 0.68 [95% CI 0.52 to 0.89]; p = 0.005). For patients with an injury claim at 1 year after major surgery, there was more pain (36 ± 29 versus 27 ± 27, adjusted mean difference 9 [95% CI 4 to 15]; p = 0.002), worse hand function (66 ± 28 versus 76 ± 26, adjusted mean difference -9 [95% CI -15 to -4]; p = 0.001), and a 45% lower probability of returning to work each week (HR 0.55 [95% CI 0.42 to 0.73]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Personal injury claim involvement was associated with more posttreatment pain and a longer time to return to work for patients treated for hand or wrist disorders, regardless of treatment invasiveness. Patients with a personal injury claim who underwent surgery also rated their postoperative hand function as worse than similar patients who did not have a claim. Depending on treatment invasiveness, only 42% to 55% of the personal injury claim patients experienced a clinically relevant improvement in pain. We recommend that clinicians extensively discuss the expected treatment outcomes and the low probability of a clinically relevant improvement in pain with their personal injury claim patients and that they broach the possibility of postponing treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Comparing Patient-Reported Outcomes on Three-Ligament Tenodesis between Partial and Complete Scapholunate Ligament Injuries: A Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Multiple studies report outcomes after 3-ligament tenodesis (3-LT) in treating traumatic scapholunate interosseous ligament injury (SLIL). However, investigators do not differentiate between patients with partial or complete SLIL injury. The relation between the extent of SLIL disruption and surgical outcomes and if this should be considered when treating a patient with SLIL injury remains unknown. We aimed to evaluate differences in patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) scores, satisfaction and return to work between patients with partial or complete chronic traumatic SLIL injury treated with 3 ligament tenodesis at 12 months after surgery. METHODS: All patients with chronic SLIL injury (partial and complete) who were treated with 3-LT at our clinic and received the same postoperative management between December 2011 and December 2019 were studied. Only patients who had completed the PRWE and return to work questionnaires preoperatively and 12 months after surgery were included. Patients were allocated to the partial (classified as Geissler 2 or 3) or complete SLIL injury group (classified as Geissler 4) by retrospectively assessing wrist arthroscopy reports. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with partial and 90 with complete SLIL injuries were included. At 1-year follow-up, PRWE scores had significantly improved in both groups. When adjusting for clinical baseline characteristics, there was no statistically significant difference between patients with partial or complete SLIL injury. Patients with complete SLIL injury had a 70% higher return to work within the first 12 months after 3-LT; however, satisfaction with the treatment result was similar for both study groups 1 year after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with complete and partial traumatic SLIL injury report better PRWE total scores at 12 months after 3-LT, but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in PRWE scores or satisfaction with the treatment result. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Patient-Reported Outcomes 1 Year After Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: Implant survival, range of motion, and complications of proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty have been reported often, but patient-reported outcomes are less frequently described. This study evaluated patients' experiences during the first year after proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty, measured with the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ). The primary focus was the reduction of patient-reported pain after proximal interphalangeal joint implant placement and the percentage of patients who considered this reduction clinically relevant, indicated by the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). METHODS: Data were collected prospectively; 98 patients completed the MHQ before and at 3 and 12 months after surgery. Our primary outcome was the change in the pain score. An increase of 24 points or more was considered a clinically important difference. Secondary outcomes included changes in MHQ total and subscale scores and MCIDs, range of motion (ROM), patient satisfaction with the outcome of the surgery, and complications. RESULTS: The pain score improved significantly, from 42 (95% confidence interval, 38-46) at baseline to 65 (95% confidence interval, 60-69) at 12 months after surgery. The MCID was reached by 50% (n = 49) of patients. The ROM did not improve, reoperations occurred in 13% (n = 13) of patients, and swan neck deformities only occurred among surface replacement implants. CONCLUSIONS: Although most patients undergoing arthroplasty for osteoarthritis experienced significantly less pain after surgery, the pain reduction was considered clinically relevant in only 50% (n = 49) of patients. Patients with high MHQ pain scores before surgery are at risk for postoperative pain reduction that will not be clinically relevant. Likewise, the other subscales of the MHQ improved after surgery, but reached a clinically relevant improvement in only 46% (n = 45) to 63% (n = 62) of patients. This knowledge can be used during preoperative consultation to improve shared decision making. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic IV.

Long-term outcomes after ulna shortening osteotomy: a mean follow-up of six years.

AIMS: The primary aim of this study was to describe long-term patient-reported outcomes after ulna shortening osteotomy for ulna impaction syndrome. METHODS: Overall, 89 patients treated between July 2011 and November 2017 who had previously taken part in a routine outcome evaluation up to 12 months postoperatively were sent an additional questionnaire in February 2021. The primary outcome was the Patient-Rated Wrist and Hand Evaluation (PRWHE) total score. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction with treatment results, complications, and subsequent treatment for ulnar-sided wrist pain. Linear mixed models were used to compare preoperative, 12 months, and late follow-up (ranging from four to nine years) PRWHE scores. RESULTS: Long-term outcomes were available in 66 patients (74%) after a mean follow-up of six years (SD 1). The mean PRWHE total score improved from 63 before surgery to 19 at late follow-up (difference in means (Δ) 44; 95% confidence interval (CI) 39 to 50; p = <0.001). Between 12 months and late follow-up, the PRWHE total score also improved (Δ 12; 95% CI 6 to 18; p = < 0.001). At late follow-up, 14/66 of patients (21%) reported a PRWHE total score of zero, whereas this was 3/51 patients (6%) at 12 months (p = 0.039). In all, 58/66 patients (88%) would undergo the same treatment again under similar circumstances. Subsequent treatment (total n = 66; surgical n = 57) for complications or recurrent symptoms were performed in 50/66 patients (76%). The most prevalent type of reoperation was hardware removal in 42/66 (64%), and nonunion occurred in 8/66 (12%). CONCLUSION: Ulna shortening osteotomy improves patient-reported pain and function that seems to sustain at late follow-up. While satisfaction levels are generally high, reoperations such as hardware removal are common. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(5):375-382.

Surgical Treatment Outcome of de Quervain's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background: Surgical release of the extensor retinaculum is performed as a treatment for de Quervain's (DQ) disease when conservative treatment fails. In the literature, there is no consensus about the effectiveness of a surgical release in patients with DQ, the complication rate, or which type of incision is superior. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Methods: A systematic search was performed in Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. Articles regarding surgical treatment of DQ disease that reported outcome and complications were included. We extracted exact values of visual analog scale scores and percentages of patients who experienced pain at follow-up. Complications assessed were (sub) luxation, superficial radial nerve injuries, wound infections, and scar problems. Results: Twenty-one studies with a total of 939 patients were included. Five percent of these patients (95% CI 1%-18%) did not show complete remission of pain at follow-up. When pooled, the mean reduction in visual analog scale scores was 5.7 (95% CI 5.3-6.1) on a 0-10 scale. No difference in outcome between different types of surgery or incisions was seen. Based on the meta-analysis, the pooled complication rate was 11% (95% CI 5%-22%). Conclusions: Five percent of patients still have residual pain after surgical release of the first extensor compartment. Surgery type, as well as the type of incision, did not affect outcome or complication. Thus, surgical release of the extensor retinaculum for DQ disease is an effective treatment, regardless of the type of surgery.

Perilunate Injury Timing and Treatment Options: A Systematic Review.

Introduction Perilunate injuries are uncommon yet challenging and often missed injuries, representing 7% of all carpal traumas. Two types of injuries can be identified as follows: perilunate dislocations (PLD) and perilunate fracture-dislocations (PLFD). The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to establish which surgical treatment is superior for patients with perilunate injuries and the significance of delayed treatment. Methods A total of 2056 articles were screened, and 16 articles were included. Risk of bias for case-control series and case series were assessed through the National Institute of Health study quality assessment tool. Qualitative outcomes of clinical scores for hand function were compared between different time points (acute, < 7 days; delayed 7-45 days; chronic > 45 days), open and closed reduction, and PLD and PLFD. Results Overall, the clinical outcome scores of patients treated within 7 days are good. The results suggest that closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF) offers slightly better outcomes than open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for PLFD. Patients treated 6 weeks or more after the initial injury seem to have the worst overall outcomes than patients in the acute or delayed setting. The results suggest that patients with chronic PLD have even worse outcomes than patients with chronic PLFD. Conclusions Timing of surgery is essential for an optimal outcome. When there is a delay of treatment, the outcomes are inferior to those treated acutely. Early referral to centralized treatment units for perilunate injuries would allow for targeted treatment and facilitate research on this difficult wrist injury.

Associations between positive treatment outcome expectations, illness understanding, and outcomes: a cohort study on non-operative treatment of first carpometacarpal osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: More positive outcome expectations and illness perceptions are associated with better outcomes for patients with several osteoarthritic orthopedic conditions. However, it is unknown whether these factors also influence outcomes of non-operative treatment for first carpometacarpal osteoarthritis (CMC-1 OA). Therefore, we assess the role of pre-treatment outcome expectations and illness perceptions in reports of pain and hand function 3 months after non-operative treatment for CMC-1 OA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cohort study with 219 patients treated non-operatively for CMC-1 OA between September 2017 and October 2018. Patients were included in the study if they completed measures of pain and hand function, illness perceptions (scale: 0-10), and expectations (scale: 3-27) as part of routine outcome measurements. Pain and hand function were measured before treatment and 3 months after starting treatment using the Dutch version of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to assess the influence of outcome expectations and illness perceptions on pain and hand function. RESULTS: Both positive outcome expectations (B = 0.64; 95% CI [0.1-1.2]) and a better illness understanding (an illness perception subdomain; B = 1.53; 95% CI [0.2-2.9]) at baseline were associated with less pain at 3 months. For hand function, similar estimates were found. CONCLUSIONS: We found that positive outcome expectations and a better illness understanding, were associated with a better outcome of non-operative treatment for CMC-1 OA.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONNon-operative treatment can often be successful for patients with arthritis of the thumb.Outcome expectations and illness perceptions are associated with pain and hand function 3 months after non-operative treatment for thumb base osteoarthritis.Improving the outcome expectations and illness perceptions of patients through better education could improve the outcome of non-operative treatment.