What are the perspectives of patients with hand and wrist conditions, chronic pain, and patients recovering from stroke on the use of patient and outcome information in everyday care? A Mixed-Methods study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the patients' perspectives on the use of patient- and outcome information tools in everyday care and to investigate which characteristics affect general understanding and perceived value of patient- and outcome information. METHODS: This mixed-methods study included surveys and interviews on understanding, experience, decision-support, and perceived value in patients with hand and wrist conditions and chronic pain. We synthesized our quantitative and qualitative findings using a triangulation protocol and identified factors independently associated with general understanding and perceived value of patient- and outcome information using hierarchical logistic regression. RESULTS: We included 3379 patients. The data triangulation indicated that patients understand the outcome information, they find it valuable, it supports decision-making, and it improves patient-clinician interaction. The following variables were independently associated with better general understanding: having more difficulty with questionnaires (standardized odds ratio 0.34 [95%-CI 031-0.38]), having a finger condition (0.72 [0.57-0.92]), longer follow-up (0.75 [0.61-0.91]), and undergoing surgical treatment (ref: non-surgical treatment, 1.33 [1.11-1.59]). For more general value, these were: having more difficulty with questionnaires (0.40 [0.36-0.44]), having a wrist condition (0.71 [0.54-0.92]), better hand function (1.12 [1.02-1.22]), and requiring help with questionnaires (1.65 [1.33-2.05]). CONCLUSION: Patients value the use of patient- and outcome information tools in daily care and find it easy to understand. The factors associated with understanding and value can be targeted to personalized and value-based healthcare. We recommend using outcome information to improve patient independence, empowerment, and involvement in decision-making.

"Proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: Long-term follow-up of patient satisfaction, Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire scores, and reoperations."

BACKGROUND: Previously published research describes short-term outcomes after proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty, however, long-term outcomes are scarce. Therefore, we evaluated patient-reported outcomes and complications after a follow-up of at least five years following PIP joint arthroplasty. METHODS: We used prospectively gathered data from patients undergoing PIP joint arthroplasty with silicone or surface replacement implants. Time points included preoperative, one year, and at least five years postoperatively. We were able to include 74 patients. Primarily, we focussed on patient satisfaction with the treatment outcome, measured using a validated 5-point Likert scale. Secondary outcomes included the question whether patients would undergo the same surgery again, the assessment of factors associated with (dis)satisfaction, the Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ), and the number of reoperations. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was seven years (SD 1.2, range 5-11 years). Patient satisfaction was excellent in 14 (19%), good in 17 (23%), reasonable in 18 (24%), moderate in 10 (14%), and poor in 15 (20%) patients. Seventy-three percent of patients (n=54) would undergo the same procedure again. We found no factors associated with (dis)satisfaction. All MHQ scores improved significantly in the first year after surgery and did not deteriorate afterward. Sixteen (16%) fingers required a reoperation, of whom 3 (4%) needed a prosthesis replacement. CONCLUSION: Patient satisfaction with treatment outcomes seven years post-PIP implant surgery ranges from moderate to good for many patients, with a notable proportion expressing dissatisfaction. Patient-reported outcomes improve primarily within the first year and remain stable at five years or more. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

The Validity and Responsiveness of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in Patients With First Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the content, construct, and discriminative validity and responsiveness of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) in patients with thumb carpometacarpal arthritis. METHODS: Data were collected at Xpert Clinics, comprising 34 outpatient hand surgery and hand therapy clinics in the Netherlands. We included 267 patients for content validity and 323 patients for construct validity and responsiveness. The PSFS items were classified into the International Classification of Function Core Set for Hand Conditions to assess content validity. We used hypothesis testing to investigate the construct validity and responsiveness. The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire was used as a comparator instrument. The standardized response mean was calculated to evaluate the magnitude of change. For discriminative validity, we used independent t tests to discriminate between satisfied and dissatisfied patients. RESULTS: We classified 98% of the PSFS items in the International Classification of Function "activities" and "participation" domains, indicating good content validity. Two of six hypotheses for construct validity and three of six hypotheses for responsiveness were confirmed. The standardized response mean for the PSFS was 0.57 (0.46-0.68) and 0.47 (0.35-0.58) for the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire total score. The mean PSFS score showed good discriminative validity because it could distinguish between satisfied and dissatisfied patients at the 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The PSFS scores showed good content and discriminative validity in patients with first carpometacarpal arthritis. Hypothesis testing for responsiveness and construct validity indicates that the PSFS measures a unique construct different from the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The PSFS may be a useful scale for measuring the patient-specific status of individuals with thumb carpometacarpal arthritis.

Patient-Reported and Clinical Outcomes After Tendon Autograft Reconstruction of the Thumb Ulnar Collateral Ligament.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to report clinical and patient-reported outcomes collected in a registry after thumb ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction with a free tendon autograft. Furthermore, the patient-reported outcomes of patients with persistent instability after reconstruction and patients with concomitant metacarpophalangeal joint arthritis diagnosed during surgery were analyzed. METHODS: Patients undergoing reconstruction with a tendon autograft between December 2011 and February 2021 were included. Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) scores at baseline were compared with those at 3 and 12 months after surgery. Stability was tested at 3 months after surgery. Tip and key pinch strength and metacarpophalangeal joint range of motion were measured at baseline and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: We included 31 patients with thumb UCL insufficiency or failed UCL surgery who underwent reconstruction. The MHQ total score improved significantly from 62 at baseline to 75 at 3 months and continued to increase to 84 at 12 months after surgery. The MHQ function and pain scores improved significantly from intake to 3 and 12 months after surgery. Twenty-six of 31 patients (84%) regained postoperative metacarpophalangeal stability. Key pinch strength improved significantly 12 months after surgery from 5.2 kg at baseline to 6.4 kg at 12 months. The MHQ total, pain, and function scores of patients with persistent instability remained similar from baseline to 12 months after surgery. In four patients with metacarpophalangeal arthritis, the MHQ total and pain score improved significantly from baseline to 3 and 12 months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported outcomes, including pain and function, improved after thumb UCL reconstruction with a tendon autograft. Although the sample size of patients with thumb metacarpophalangeal arthritis diagnosed during surgery was small, they reached adequate patient-reported outcomes at 12 months after surgery. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Should we always perform scaphoid nonunion surgery in patients with minor preoperative symptoms?

The objective of this study was to assess the downsides of surgical treatment of scaphoid fracture nonunion in patients with minor preoperative symptoms. Patients were classified with minor symptoms based on the Patient-Rated Hand/Wrist Evaluation questionnaire. Of the 35 included patients, most patients encountered problems with patient-specific activities; 9% reported worse postoperative functional outcomes, 34% were not satisfied with the treatment and 9% were reoperated. The risk of a worse functional outcome after surgery with the need for further operations and the chance of developing wrist osteoarthritis, along with the possibility of poor patient satisfaction and ongoing daily functional impairment, should be considered during preoperative counselling.Level of evidence: III.

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.

Incision techniques for trigger thumb release: a comparison of outcomes of four types of skin incision.

Although trigger thumb release is commonly performed, there is no consensus on the optimal skin incision. This study aimed to compare outcomes of four incision techniques, including V-shaped, oblique, transverse and longitudinal incisions. Outcomes included the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire, satisfaction with the treatment and postoperative complications. The results of 875 patients who underwent trigger thumb release were assessed. All groups demonstrated improvement in self-reported hand function (range of 10-14 points), pain (25-27 points) and aesthetics (4-7 points) from baseline to 3 months postoperatively with no differences between incision techniques. Of the patients, 76% reported good or excellent satisfaction with the outcome of treatment. Satisfaction and complication rates of the different incision techniques were similar. These findings imply that there is no clear benefit of one type of incision over another for trigger thumb release, suggesting that surgeons may use the technique of their preference.Level of evidence: III.

From Data to Decisions: How AI Is Revolutionizing Clinical Prediction Models in Plastic Surgery.

SUMMARY: The impact of clinical prediction models within Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) is significant. With its ability to analyze vast amounts of data and identify complex patterns, machine learning has the potential to improve and implement evidence-based plastic, reconstructive, and hand surgery. Among others, it is capable of predicting the diagnosis, prognosis, and outcomes of individual patients. This modeling aids daily clinical decision making, most commonly at the moment, as decision-support.Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to provide a practice guideline to plastic surgeons implementing AI in clinical decision-making or setting up AI research to develop clinical prediction models using the 7-step approach and the ABCD validation steps of Steyerberg et al. Secondly, we describe two important protocols which are in the development stage for AI research: 1) the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) checklist, and 2) The PROBAST checklist to access potential biases.

Driving Factors of Recommending a Hand Surgery Clinic After Surgery.

PURPOSE: Since a patient's recommendation of a clinic to others is an important indicator of patient experience, more insight is needed into the underlying factors that motivate such recommendations. This retrospective cohort study assessed the relative contribution of the following: (1) patient-related characteristics, (2) treatment outcome, (3) satisfaction with treatment outcome, and (4) patients' experience with the process of care to patients' recommendation of a specific clinic after elective surgery. METHODS: Patients of specialized outpatient hand surgery clinics (N = 6,895) reported the likelihood of recommending the clinic to friends or family 3-5 months after surgery by filling in the Net Promoter Score. Potential predictors of the Net Promoter Score were preoperative patient characteristics, patient-reported treatment outcomes, satisfaction with treatment outcome, and experience with several health care delivery domains. Linear regression analyses were used to examine the contribution of the predictors. RESULTS: Mean age of the patients was 53 (SD, 14) years, 62.5% were women, and 62.5% were employed. Preoperative patient characteristics explained 1% of the variance in clinic recommendations. An additional 6% was explained by the treatment outcome, 21.6% by satisfaction with treatment outcome, and 33.8% by patients' experience with care delivery (total explained variance was 62.3%). The strongest independent predictors of clinic recommendations were positive experiences with the quality of the facilities and the communication skills of the physician. CONCLUSIONS: Patient recommendations are more strongly driven by patients' experience with care delivery than by treatment outcome and patient characteristics. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In elective surgery, improving patient experiences is pivotal in boosting patient recommendation of the clinic.

Tailoring and evaluating treatment with the Patient-Specific Needs Evaluation: A Patient-Centered Approach.

BACKGROUND: No patient-reported instrument assesses patient-specific information needs, treatment goals, and Personal Meaningful Gain (PMG, a novel construct evaluating individualized, clinically relevant improvement). This study reports the development of the Patient-Specific Needs Evaluation (PSN) and examines its discriminative validity (i.e., its ability to distinguish satisfied from dissatisfied patients) and test-retest reliability in patients with hand or wrist conditions. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was used to develop and validate the PSN, following COSMIN guidelines, including pilot testing, a survey (pilot: n=223, final PSN: n=275), cognitive debriefing (n=16), expert input, and validation. Discriminative validity was assessed by comparing the satisfaction level of patients who did or did not achieve their PMG (n=1,985) and test-retest reliability using absolute agreement, Cohen's kappa, and ICCs (n=102). We used a sample of 2,860 patients to describe responses to the final PSN. RESULTS: The PSN has only five questions (completion time ±3 minutes) and is freely accessible online. The items and response options were considered understandable by 90-92% and complete by 84-89% of the end-users. The PSN had excellent discriminative validity (Cramer's V: 0.48, p<0.001) and moderate to high test-retest reliability (Kappa: 0.46-0.68, ICCs: 0.53-0.73). CONCLUSIONS: The PSN is a freely available patient-centered decision-support tool that helps clinicians tailor their consultations to the patient's individual needs and goals. It contains the PMG, a novel construct evaluating individualized, clinically relevant treatment outcomes. The PSN may function as a conversation starter, facilitate expectation management, and aid shared decision-making. The PSN is implementation-ready and can be readily adapted to other patient populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

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.

Long-Term Outcomes of Nonsurgical Treatment of Thumb Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Although nonsurgical treatment of thumb carpometacarpal (CMC-1) osteoarthritis (OA) provides short-term improvement, the durability of these effects beyond 1 year is unknown. In this study, we investigated patient-reported pain and limitations in activities of daily living (ADL) at >5 years following nonsurgical treatment (i.e., exercise therapy and use of an orthosis) for CMC-1 OA. We hypothesized that pain and limitations in ADL would not worsen after 12 months. Secondary outcomes were satisfaction with treatment results and health-related quality of life at >5 years of follow-up and the rate of conversion to surgery. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective cohort study using 2 overlapping samples. The change in the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) subscales of pain and ADL between 12 months and >5 years was the primary outcome as measured in the first sample (n = 170), which consisted of patients who did not undergo conversion to surgery. Additional measurement time points included baseline and 3 months. We evaluated conversion to surgery in a second sample, which included all patients who responded to the invitation for this follow-up study (n = 217). RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 6.6 years (range, 5.1 to 8.7 years), the score on the MHQ pain subscale did not differ significantly from that at 12 months. The score on the MHQ ADL improved by 4.4 points (95% confidence interval [CI],1.5 to 7.2) compared with 12 months, but this was not clinically relevant. At >5 years, 5% of the patients rated their satisfaction as "poor," 14% as "moderate," 26% as "fair," 39% as "good," and 16% as "excellent." The median EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) index score was 0.852 (range, 0.135 to 1). The rate of conversion to surgery was 22% (95% CI,16.4% to 27.7%) at a median follow-up of 7 years (range, 5.5 to 9.0 years). CONCLUSIONS: We found positive outcomes at >5 years of follow-up for nonsurgical treatment of CMC-1 OA, with no worsening of pain or of limitations in ADL after 12 months. Our findings support nonsurgical treatment as the first treatment choice and suggest that treatment effects are sustainable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.

A Sensor-Based Feedback Device Stimulating Daily Life Upper Extremity Activity in Stroke Patients: A Feasibility Study.

This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and explore the efficacy of the Arm Activity Tracker (AAT). The AAT is a device based on wrist-worn accelerometers that provides visual and tactile feedback to stimulate daily life upper extremity (UE) activity in stroke patients. METHODS: A randomised, crossover within-subject study was conducted in sub-acute stroke patients admitted to a rehabilitation centre. Feasibility encompassed (1) adherence: the dropout rate and the number of participants with insufficient AAT data collection; (2) acceptance: the technology acceptance model (range: 7-112) and (3) usability: the system usability scale (range: 0-100). A two-way ANOVA was used to estimate the difference between the baseline, intervention and control conditions for (1) paretic UE activity and (2) UE activity ratio. RESULTS: Seventeen stroke patients were included. A 29% dropout rate was observed, and two participants had insufficient data collection. Participants who adhered to the study reported good acceptance (median (IQR): 94 (77-111)) and usability (median (IQR): 77.5 (75-78.5)-). We found small to medium effect sizes favouring the intervention condition for paretic UE activity (η2G = 0.07, p = 0.04) and ratio (η2G = 0.11, p = 0.22). CONCLUSION: Participants who adhered to the study showed good acceptance and usability of the AAT and increased paretic UE activity. Dropouts should be further evaluated, and a sufficiently powered trial should be performed to analyse efficacy.

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.

System identification: a feasible, reliable and valid way to quantify upper limb motor impairments.

BACKGROUND: Upper limb impairments in a hemiparetic arm are clinically quantified by well-established clinical scales, known to suffer poor validity, reliability, and sensitivity. Alternatively, robotics can assess motor impairments by characterizing joint dynamics through system identification. In this study, we establish the merits of quantifying abnormal synergy, spasticity, and changes in joint viscoelasticity using system identification, evaluating (1) feasibility and quality of parametric estimates, (2) test-retest reliability, (3) differences between healthy controls and patients with upper limb impairments, and (4) construct validity. METHODS: Forty-five healthy controls, twenty-nine stroke patients, and twenty cerebral palsy patients participated. Participants were seated with the affected arm immobilized in the Shoulder-Elbow-Perturbator (SEP). The SEP is a one-degree-of-freedom perturbator that enables applying torque perturbations to the elbow while providing varying amounts of weight support to the human arm. Participants performed either a 'do not intervene' or a resist task. Elbow joint admittance was quantified and used to extract elbow viscosity and stiffness. Fifty-four of the participants performed two sessions to establish the test-retest reliability of the parameters. Construct validity was assessed by correlating system identification parameters to parameters extracted using a SEP protocol that objectifies current clinical scales (Re-Arm protocol). RESULTS: Feasibility was confirmed by all participants successfully completing the study protocol within ~ 25 min without reporting pain or burden. The parametric estimates were good with a variance-accounted-for of ~ 80%. A fair to excellent test-retest reliability was found ([Formula: see text]) for patients, except for elbow stiffness with full weight support ([Formula: see text]). Compared to healthy controls, patients had a higher elbow viscosity and stiffness during the 'do not intervene' task and lower viscosity and stiffness during the resist task. Construct validity was confirmed by a significant (all [Formula: see text]) but weak to moderate ([Formula: see text]) correlation with parameters from the Re-Arm protocol. CONCLUSIONS: This work demonstrates that system identification is feasible and reliable for quantifying upper limb motor impairments. Validity was confirmed by differences between patients and controls and correlations with other measurements, but further work is required to optimize the experimental protocol and establish clinical value.

Outcomes of an exercise program in patients with dorsal or volar midcarpal laxity: a cohort study of 213 patients.

PURPOSE: Describing the outcomes of an exercise program on wrist and hand function for patients with midcarpal instability (MCI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study has a prospective cohort design. Two hundred and thirteen patients with MCI were included. The intervention was a 3-month exercise program consisting of hand therapy and home exercises. The primary outcome was perceived wrist and hand function evaluated with the Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (PRWHE) three months after treatment onset. Secondary outcomes were conversion to surgery, pain, and satisfaction with treatment results. RESULTS: PRWHE total scores improved from 51 ± 19 (mean ± SD) to 33 ± 24 at 3 months (95% CI: 36-30, p < 0.001). All visual analog scales for pain demonstrated clinically relevant improvements at 6 weeks and 3 months (p < 0.001). At 3 months, 81% of the participants would undergo the treatment again. After a median follow-up of 2.8 years, 46 patients (22%) converted to surgery. CONCLUSIONS: We found clinically relevant improvements in hand and wrist function and pain. Most participants would undergo treatment again and 78% of the participants did not convert to surgery. Hence, non-invasive treatment should be the primary treatment choice for patients with MCI.

Midcarpal instability (MCI) is a disabling condition and treatment options are limited.Patients with MCI can benefit from an exercise program aiming to improve the strength and coordination of the wrist muscles.Participants improved in hand/wrist function and 78% did not convert to surgery.Non-invasive treatment should be the primary treatment choice for these patients.

Multiple Compression Syndromes of the Same Upper Extremity: Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Treatment Outcomes of Concomitant Treatment.

PURPOSE: Multiple nerve compression syndromes can co-occur. Little is known about this coexistence, especially about risk factors and surgical outcomes. Therefore, this study aimed to describe the prevalence of multiple nerve compression syndromes in the same arm in a surgical cohort and determine risk factors. Additionally, the surgical outcomes of concomitant treatment were studied. METHODS: The prevalence of surgically treated multiple nerve compression syndromes within one year was assessed using a review of patients' electronic records. Patient characteristics, comorbidities, and baseline scores of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire were considered as risk factors. To determine the treatment outcomes of simultaneous treatment, patients who underwent concomitant carpal tunnel release (CTR) and cubital tunnel release (CubTR) were selected. The treatment outcomes were Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire scores at intake and at 3 and 6 months after the surgery, satisfaction 6 months after the surgery, and return to work within the first year. RESULTS: A total of 7,867 patients underwent at least one nerve decompression between 2011 and 2021. Of these patients, 2.9% underwent multiple decompressions for the same upper extremity within one year. The risk factors for this were severe symptoms, younger age, and smoking. Furthermore, the treatment outcomes of concomitant CTR and CubTR did not differ from those of CubTR alone. The median time to return to work after concomitant treatment was 6 weeks. Patients who underwent CTR or CubTR alone returned to work after 4 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 3% of the patients who underwent surgical treatment for nerve compression syndrome underwent decompression for another nerve within 1 year. Patients who report severe symptoms at intake, are younger, or smoke are at a greater risk. Patients with carpal and cubital tunnel syndrome may benefit from simultaneous decompression. The time to return to work may be less than if they underwent decompressions in separate procedures, whereas their surgical outcomes are comparable with those of CubTR alone. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.