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.

High Quality of Care Delivery Improves Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life Outcomes After Breast Augmentation.

BACKGROUND: Breast augmentation is one of the most common aesthetic procedures worldwide. Most studies focused on evaluating the outcome with validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and factors that may influence them. However, the influence of care delivery, which can be measured with patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), is scarce in breast augmentation patients. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the associations between PREMs and PROMs in patients who underwent breast augmentation. METHODS: A multicenter cohort study was conducted in breast augmentation patients. Patients completed PREMs, including aspects such as communication between physician and patient, expectation management, welcome, and hygiene and the BREAST-Q PROM Satisfaction with Breasts, Psychosocial-, Physical- and Sexual well-being, preoperatively and six-months postoperatively. Regression analyses were used to investigate the associations between PREMs and PROMs. RESULTS: Overall, 329 patients were included between 2018-2022. Univariate regression analysis showed a positive association between PREMs and PROMs scales. The aspects of the feeling of being heard (B=-38.39 and B=-18.90), the opportunity to ask questions (B=-9.21) and trust in their physician (B=-39.08) had the highest association with the change in the four BREAST-Q scales. The multivariable regression analysis showed that the variance in PROMs related to changes in PREMs (19%) was hardly influenced by patient characteristics (1%). CONCLUSIONS: Patient outcomes are more positive after breast augmentation when patients feel they are being heard, have the opportunity to ask questions and have trust in their physician. Future studies should be targeted at optimizing patient-reported experience to investigate whether this would improve patient-reported outcomes.

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.

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.

Determining the Minimally Important Change of the Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire in patients undergoing trigger finger release.

INTRODUCTION: The Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) is a widely used instrument to evaluate treatment results for hand conditions. Establishing the Minimally Important Change (MIC) is essential for interpreting change in outcome that is clinically relevant. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The purpose of this study was to determine the MIC of the MHQ total and subscale scores in patients undergoing trigger finger release. STUDY DESIGN: This is a prospective cohort study conducted between December 2011 and February 2020. METHODS: Patients completed the MHQ prior to surgery and 3 months postoperatively. The MIC of the MHQ was determined using 5 anchor-based methods (ie, 2 anchor mean change methods and 3 receiver operating characteristic methods). The median MIC value was determined to represent the triangulated MIC. RESULTS: A total of 1814 patients were included. The MIC for the MHQ total score ranged from 7.7 to 10.9, with a triangulated estimate of 9.3. The MIC estimates for 5 of 6 of the MHQ subscales ranged from 7.7 to 20.0. No MICs could be determined for the MHQ subscale "aesthetics" due to low correlations between the anchor questions and MHQ change scores. CONCLUSIONS: These MIC estimates can contribute to the interpretation of clinical outcomes following trigger finger release and for assessment of power in prospective trials.

Rasch Analysis of the Michigan Hand Questionnaire.

OBJECTIVES: The Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) is a commonly used evaluation for hand problems, but previous work reports conflicting evidence regarding the subscale structures. Rasch analysis uses probabilistic modeling of items and responses: if scale items can be fit to the Rasch model, it provides evidence of construct validity and interval-level measurement for precise statistical estimates. We conducted Rasch analysis on the MHQ to evaluate model fit, unidimensionality of the subscales, bias across person factors, and conversion to interval metrics. METHODS: We conducted a secondary Rasch analysis of MHQ data from 924 persons with thumb basal joint osteoarthritis using the RUMM2030 software. Modeling was based on responses for the most affected hand and person factors including age, sex, type of work, whether the dominant side was the most affected, and surgical status. The analysis plan followed the published recommendations for examinations of person and item fit, with iterative adjustments as required. RESULTS: A total of 11 of the 37 items required rescoring to create orderly progression of scoring thresholds. Only the overall hand function and pain subscales could be fit to the Rasch model, demonstrating unidimensionality and good reliability of fit estimates. Dividing the activities of daily living subscale into unilateral and bilateral activities also allowed unilateral activities to fit the model. Persistent misfitting in other subscales suggested local dependency and response bias across multiple person factors. CONCLUSIONS: This Rasch analysis of the MHQ raises concerns regarding the validity and fundamental measurement properties of this widely used outcome evaluation when used as a summary score.

Machine Learning Can be Used to Predict Function but Not Pain After Surgery for Thumb Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis is offered to patients who do not benefit from nonoperative treatment. Although surgery is generally successful in reducing symptoms, not all patients benefit. Predicting clinical improvement after surgery could provide decision support and enhance preoperative patient selection. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This study aimed to develop and validate prediction models for clinically important improvement in (1) pain and (2) hand function 12 months after surgery for thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis. METHODS: Between November 2011 and June 2020, 2653 patients were surgically treated for thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis. Patient-reported outcome measures were used to preoperatively assess pain, hand function, and satisfaction with hand function, as well as the general mental health of patients and mindset toward their condition. Patient characteristics, medical history, patient-reported symptom severity, and patient-reported mindset were considered as possible predictors. Patients who had incomplete Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaires at baseline or 12 months postsurgery were excluded, as these scores were used to determine clinical improvement. The Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire provides subscores for pain and hand function. Scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating less pain and better hand function. An improvement of at least the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of 14.4 for the pain score and 11.7 for the function score were considered "clinically relevant." These values were derived from previous reports that provided triangulated estimates of two anchor-based and one distribution-based MCID. Data collection resulted in a dataset of 1489 patients for the pain model and 1469 patients for the hand function model. The data were split into training (60%), validation (20%), and test (20%) dataset. The training dataset was used to select the predictive variables and to train our models. The performance of all models was evaluated in the validation dataset, after which one model was selected for further evaluation. Performance of this final model was evaluated on the test dataset. We trained the models using logistic regression, random forest, and gradient boosting machines and compared their performance. We chose these algorithms because of their relative simplicity, which makes them easier to implement and interpret. Model performance was assessed using discriminative ability and qualitative visual inspection of calibration curves. Discrimination was measured using area under the curve (AUC) and is a measure of how well the model can differentiate between the outcomes (improvement or no improvement), with an AUC of 0.5 being equal to chance. Calibration is a measure of the agreement between the predicted probabilities and the observed frequencies and was assessed by visual inspection of calibration curves. We selected the model with the most promising performance for clinical implementation (that is, good model performance and a low number of predictors) for further evaluation in the test dataset. RESULTS: For pain, the random forest model showed the most promising results based on discrimination, calibration, and number of predictors in the validation dataset. In the test dataset, this pain model had a poor AUC (0.59) and poor calibration. For function, the gradient boosting machine showed the most promising results in the validation dataset. This model had a good AUC (0.74) and good calibration in the test dataset. The baseline Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire hand function score was the only predictor in the model. For the hand function model, we made a web application that can be accessed via https://analyse.equipezorgbedrijven.nl/shiny/cmc1-prediction-model-Eng/. CONCLUSION: We developed a promising model that may allow clinicians to predict the chance of functional improvement in an individual patient undergoing surgery for thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis, which would thereby help in the decision-making process. However, caution is warranted because our model has not been externally validated. Unfortunately, the performance of the prediction model for pain is insufficient for application in clinical practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Assessment of Patient Satisfaction With Appearance, Psychological Well-being, and Aging Appraisal After Upper Blepharoplasty: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: To determine the success of an upper blepharoplasty, a popular cosmetic procedure, it is essential to measure outcomes from the patient perspective because these often outweigh objective outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess patient-reported satisfaction with facial appearance, psychological well-being, and aging appraisal after upper blepharoplasty with validated questionnaires. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included upper blepharoplasty patients from 8 outpatient clinics. Patient-reported satisfaction was assessed with the FACE-Q at intake, and 6 and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: In total, 2134 patients were included. High satisfaction with outcome and decision to undergo treatment were measured 6 months postoperatively. Large improvements in FACE-Q scores (range, 0-100) between intake and 6 months postoperatively were seen for satisfaction with appearance (mean, effect size: eyes +48, 2.6; upper eyelids +48, 3.1; facial appearance overall +26, 1.4), psychological well-being (+11, 0.56), and aging appraisal (+22, 1.0). Patients reported they appeared a mean [standard deviation] 3.3 [5.2] years younger postblepharoplasty. No clinically relevant changes were seen between 6 and 12 months. Additionally, improvements in appearance were not dependent on their intake scores, whereas improvements in psychological well-being and aging appraisal were smaller in patients with higher intake scores. Satisfaction with treatment outcome was strongly correlated with appearance satisfaction but not with aging appraisal. CONCLUSIONS: Significant improvements in patient satisfaction regarding appearance, psychological well-being, and aging appraisal can be seen 6 months after blepharoplasty, and outcomes remain stable up to 12 months postoperatively. These data may be used to inform patients and clinicians and improve the overall quality of care.

Patients With Higher Treatment Outcome Expectations Are More Satisfied With the Results of Nonoperative Treatment for Thumb Base Osteoarthritis: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how satisfaction with treatment outcome is associated with patient mindset and Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire (MHQ) scores at baseline and 3 months in patients receiving nonoperative treatment for first carpometacarpal joint (CMC-1) osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: Cohort study SETTING: A total of 20 outpatient locations of a clinic for hand surgery and hand therapy in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (N=308) receiving nonoperative treatment for CMC-1 OA, including exercise therapy, an orthosis, or both, between September 2017 and February 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Nonoperative treatment (ie, exercise therapy, an orthosis, or both) MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Satisfaction with treatment outcomes was measured after 3 months of treatment. We measured total MHQ score at baseline and at 3 months. As baseline mindset factors, patients completed questionnaires on treatment outcome expectations, illness perceptions, pain catastrophizing, and psychological distress. We used multivariable logistic regression analysis and mediation analysis to identify factors associated with satisfaction with treatment outcomes. RESULTS: More positive pretreatment outcome expectations were associated with a higher probability of being satisfied with treatment outcomes at 3 months (odds ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.25). Only a relatively small part (33%) of this association was because of a higher total MHQ score at 3 months. None of the other mindset and hand function variables at baseline were associated with satisfaction with treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that patients with higher pretreatment outcome expectations are more likely to be satisfied with treatment outcomes after 3 months of nonoperative treatment for CMC-1 OA. This association could only partially be explained by a better functional outcome at 3 months for patients who were satisfied. Health care providers treating patients nonoperatively for CMC-1 OA should be aware of the importance of expectations and may take this into account in pretreatment counseling.

Test-retest Reliability and Construct Validity of the Satisfaction with Treatment Result Questionnaire in Patients with Hand and Wrist Conditions: A Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: A patient's satisfaction with a treatment result is an important outcome domain as clinicians increasingly focus on patient-centered, value-based healthcare. However, to our knowledge, there are no validated satisfaction metrics focusing on treatment results for hand and wrist conditions. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Among patients who were treated for hand and wrist conditions, we asked: (1) What is the test-retest reliability of the Satisfaction with Treatment Result Questionnaire? (2) What is the construct validity of that outcomes tool? METHODS: This was a prospective study using two samples: a test-retest reliability sample and a construct validity sample. For the test-retest sample, data collection took place between February 2020 and May 2020, and we included 174 patients at the end of their treatment with complete baseline data that included both the primary test and the retest. Test-retest reliability was evaluated with a mean time difference of 7.2 ± 1.6 days. For the construct validity sample, data collection took place between January 2012 and May 2020. We included 3742 patients who completed the Satisfaction with Treatment Result Questionnaire, VAS, and the Net Promotor Score (NPS) at 3 months. Construct validity was evaluated using hypothesis testing in which we correlated the patients' level of satisfaction to the willingness to undergo the treatment again, VAS scores, and the NPS. We performed additional hypothesis testing on 2306 patients who also completed the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ). Satisfaction with the treatment result was measured as the patients' level of satisfaction on a 5-point Likert scale and their willingness to undergo the treatment again under similar circumstances. RESULTS: We found high reliability for level of satisfaction measured on Likert scale (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.86 [95% CI 0.81 to 0.89]) and almost-perfect agreement for both level of satisfaction measured on the Likert scale (weighted kappa 0.86 [95% CI 0.80 to 0.91]) and willingness to undergo the treatment again (kappa 0.81 [95% CI 0.70 to 0.92]) of the Satisfaction with Treatment Result Questionnaire. Construct validity was good to excellent as seven of the eight hypotheses were confirmed. In the confirmed hypotheses, there was a moderate-to-strong correlation with VAS pain, VAS function, NPS, MHQ pain, and MHQ general hand function (Spearman rho ranged from 0.43 to 0.67; all p < 0.001) and a strong to very strong correlation with VAS satisfaction and MHQ satisfaction (Spearman rho 0.73 and 0.71; both p < 0.001). The rejected hypothesis indicated only a moderate correlation between the level of satisfaction on a 5-point Likert scale and the willingness to undergo the treatment again under similar circumstances (Spearman rho 0.44; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The Satisfaction with Treatment Result Questionnaire has good-to-excellent construct validity and very high test-retest reliability in patients with hand and wrist conditions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This questionnaire can be used to reliably and validly measure satisfaction with treatment result in striving for patient-centered care and value-based healthcare. Future research should investigate predictors of variation in satisfaction with treatment results.

Content validity and responsiveness of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in patients with Dupuytren's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported outcome measures have become the standard tool for reflecting the patient's perspective on their treatment outcome for a wide variety of hand conditions. The Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), is an individualized questionnaire that enables patients to specify those activities with which they have difficulty in daily life. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: This study aims to determine the content validity and responsiveness of the PSFS compared with the Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) in patients with Dupuytren's disease. STUDY DESIGN: Multicentre inception cohort. METHODS: Patients with Dupuytren's disease being treated with percutaneous needle aponeurotomy, limited fasciectomy, or skin graft were selected from a database with routine outcome measurements in usual care. To assess content validity of the PSFS, the activities specified by patients were classified into the International Classification of Function core set for hand conditions. The standardized response mean is calculated for the pre- and post-change scores of the PSFS to evaluate responsiveness. RESULTS: Three hundred and eight patients were analyzed before and three months after treatment. Content validity of the PSFS was appropriate because 95% of all items could be classified into the International Classification of Function activities and participation domain. The standardized response mean of the PSFS was 1.0 (95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.2), which was substantially larger than the standardized response mean of the MHQ score 0.58 (95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.74). DISCUSSION: The PSFS is a content-valid questionnaire which may be more responsive to change than a fixed-item instrument such as the MHQ in patients with Dupuytren's disease. CONCLUSIONS: The PSFS is a valuable tool to set therapy goals and evaluate the progress over time in patients with Dupuytren's disease.

Beneficial Effects of Nonsurgical Treatment for Symptomatic Thumb Carpometacarpal Instability in Clinical Practice: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe outcomes of nonsurgical treatment for symptomatic thumb carpometacarpal joint (CMC-1) instability. Secondary, to evaluate the conversion rate to surgical treatment. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: A total of 20 outpatient clinics for hand surgery and hand therapy in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: A consecutive sample of patients with symptomatic CMC-1 instability (N=431). INTERVENTION: Nonsurgical treatment including exercise therapy and an orthosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain (visual analog scale [VAS], 0-100) and hand function (Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire [MHQ], 0-100) at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 months. Conversion to surgery was recorded for all patients with a median follow-up of 2.8 years (range, 0.8-6.7y). RESULTS: VAS scores for pain during the last week, at rest, and during physical load improved with a mean difference at 3 months of 17 (97.5% CI, 9-25), 13 (97.5% CI, 9-18), and 19 (97.5% CI, 12-27), respectively (P<.001). No difference was present at 3 months for MHQ total score, but the subscales activities of daily living, work, pain, and satisfaction improved by 7 (97.5% CI, 1-14), 10 (97.5% CI, 4-16), 5 (97.5% CI, 2-9), and 12 (97.5% CI, 2-22) points, respectively (P<.001-.007). After median follow-up of 2.8 years, only 59 participants (14%) were surgically treated. Both in the subgroups that did and did not convert to surgery, VAS pain scores decreased at 3 months compared with baseline (P<.001-.010), whereas MHQ total score did not improve in both subgroups. However, VAS and MHQ scores remained worse for patients who eventually converted to surgery (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large sample of patients with symptomatic CMC-1 instability, nonsurgical treatment demonstrated clinically relevant improvements in pain and aspects of hand function. Furthermore, after 2.8 years, only 14% of all patients were surgically treated, indicating that nonsurgical treatment is a successful treatment of choice.

Illness Perceptions of Patients With First Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, Dupuytren Contracture, or Trigger Finger.

PURPOSE: Previous studies indicate that patients with a more negative perception of their illness tend to respond less favorably to treatment, but little is known about whether illness perceptions differ based on the type of hand or wrist conditions. Therefore, we compared illness perceptions between patients scheduled to undergo surgery for 4 illnesses in hand surgery: carpometacarpal osteoarthritis (CMC OA), Dupuytren disease, carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), and trigger finger syndrome (TFS). We hypothesized there would be differences in illness perception between these patient groups. METHODS: Before surgery, patients were asked to complete the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (Brief-IPQ) as part of routine outcome measurement in a specialized hand and wrist surgery clinic. The Brief-IPQ is a validated questionnaire to rapidly assess the cognitive and emotional representation of illness. Differences in illness perception between the 4 diagnostic groups, corrected for age, sex, hand dominance, and work type, were examined. Cohen D effect sizes were calculated for the between-group differences. RESULTS: We included 514 patients in the analyses: 87 with CMC OA, 146 with Dupuytren disease, 129 with CTS, and 152 with TFS. On a scale ranging from 0 (most positive perception) to 80 (most negative perception) the Brief-IPQ sum scores for these subgroups were 42.0, 28.2, 38.8, and 33.3, respectively. Corrected for age, sex, hand dominance, and work type, patients with Dupuytren disease had a more positive perception of their illness than patients with CMC OA and CTS. Compared with CMC OA patients, the effect sizes for Dupuytren, CTS, and TFS patients were, respectively, 1.28, 0.32, and 0.81. CONCLUSIONS: In these patients with various hand/wrist disorders, differences were found in their preoperative perceptions of illness. Interventions that directly target negative illness perceptions might improve treatment outcomes for CMC OA and CTS. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These differences should be considered during preoperative medical consultations and/or when investigating surgical outcomes.

Predicting Outcome After Hand Orthosis and Hand Therapy for Thumb Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis: A Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To identify predictive factors for outcome after splinting and hand therapy for carpometacarpal (CMC) osteoarthritis (OA) and to identify predictive factors for conversion to surgical treatment; and (2) to determine how many patients who have not improved in outcome within 6 weeks after start of treatment will eventually improve after 3 months. DESIGN: Observational prospective multicenter cohort study. SETTING: Xpert Clinic in the Netherlands. This clinic comprises 15 locations in the Netherlands, with 16 European Board certified (FESSH) hand surgeons and over 50 hand therapists. PARTICIPANTS: Between 2011 and 2014, patients with CMC OA (N=809) received splinting and weekly hand therapy for 3 months. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Satisfaction and pain were measured with a visual analog scale and function with the Michigan Hand Questionnaire at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 months posttreatment. Using regression analysis, patient demographics and pretreatment baseline scores were considered as predictors for the outcome of conservative treatment after 3 months and for conversion to surgery. RESULTS: Multivariable regression model explained 34%-42% of the variance in outcome (P<.001) with baseline satisfaction, pain, and function as significant predictors. Cox regression analysis showed that baseline pain and function were significant predictors for receiving surgery. Of patients with no clinically relevant improvement in pain and function after 6 weeks, 73%-83% also had no clinically relevant improvement after 3 months. CONCLUSION: This study showed that patients with either high pain or low function may benefit most from conservative treatment. We therefore recommend to always start with conservative treatment, regardless of symptom severity of functional loss at start of treatment. Furthermore, it seems valuable to discuss the possibility of surgery with patients after 6 weeks of therapy, when levels of improvement are still mainly unsatisfactory.

Exercise Therapy in Addition to an Orthosis Reduces Pain More Than an Orthosis Alone in Patients With Thumb Base Osteoarthritis: A Propensity Score Matching Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of exercises and orthotics with orthotics alone on pain and hand function in patients with first carpometacarpal joint (CMC-1) osteoarthritis (OA) and to predict outcomes on pain and hand function of exercises and orthotics. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with propensity score matching. SETTING: Data collection took place in 13 outpatient clinics for hand surgery and hand therapy in The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: A consecutive, population-based sample of patients with CMC-1 OA (N=173) was included in this study, of which 84 were matched on baseline demographics and baseline primary outcomes. INTERVENTIONS: Exercises and orthotics versus orthotics alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included pain and hand function at 3 months, measured using visual analog scale (VAS, 0-100) and the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ, 0-100). RESULTS: A larger decrease in VAS pain at rest (11.1 points difference; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-20.3; P=.002) and during physical load (22.7 points difference; 95% confidence interval, 13.6-31.0; P<.001) was found in the exercise + orthotic group compared to the orthotic group. In addition, larger improvement was found for the MHQ subscales pain, work performance, aesthetics, and satisfaction in the exercise + orthotic group. No differences were found on other outcomes. Baseline scores of metacarpophalangeal flexion, presence of scaphotrapeziotrapezoid OA, VAS pain at rest, heavy physical labor, and MHQ total predicted primary outcomes for the total exercise + orthotic group (N=131). CONCLUSIONS: Non-surgical treatment of patients with CMC-1 OA should include exercises, since there is a relatively large treatment effect compared to using an orthosis alone. Future research should study exercises and predictors in a more standardized setting to confirm this finding.

Item Reduction of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire Using Decision Tree Modeling.

OBJECTIVE: To produce an electronic decision tree version of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (DT-BCTQ) using the chi-squared automatic interaction detection (CHAID) algorithm to reduce questionnaire length of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) while minimizing the loss of measurement properties. DESIGN: Criterion standard study. All BCTQs completed between January 2012 and September 2016 by patients who were treated for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) were randomly divided into a development and a validation dataset at a 3-to-1 ratio. Optimization of the CHAID algorithm was performed in the development dataset to determine the most optimal DT-BCTQ. SETTING: Private hand clinic providing both surgical and nonsurgical (orthosis and exercise therapy) treatment for hand and wrist disorders. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with CTS (N=4470) completed a total of 10,055 BCTQs. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated between the original BCTQ scores and the scores predicted by the DT-BCTQ in the validation dataset. Bland-Altman plots visualized the agreement between the BCTQ and the DT-BCTQ. RESULTS: The DT-BCTQ reduced the number of questions needed to ask a patient from 11 to a maximum of 3 for the symptom severity scale domain and from 8 to maximum of 3 for the functional status scale domain. The ICC between the original BCTQ and DT-BCTQ was 0.94. The mean difference between the BCTQ and DT-BCTQ was 0.05 on the 0-5 scale (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.48 to 0.57) for the symptom severity scale; 0.02 (95% CI, -0.45 to 0.49) for the functional status scale; and 0.04 (95% CI, -0.31 to 0.39) for the total BCTQ score. CONCLUSION: By creating the DT-BCTQ, we diminished the number of questions needed to ask a patient from 18 to a maximum of 6 questions (3 for each subscore) when administering the BCTQ while maintaining an ICC of 0.94 with the original BCTQ.

Shorter vs Longer Immobilization After Surgery for Thumb Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if shorter immobilization is noninferior to longer immobilization after Weilby procedure for thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with propensity score matching. SETTING: Data collection took place in 16 outpatient clinics for hand surgery and hand therapy. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 131 participants with shorter immobilization and 131 participants with longer immobilization (N=262). INTERVENTION: Shorter immobilization (3-5 days plaster cast followed by a thumb spica orthosis including wrist until 4 weeks postoperatively) was compared with longer immobilization (10-14 days plaster cast followed by a thumb spica orthosis including wrist until 6 weeks postoperatively) after Weilby procedure for first carpometacarpal joint osteoarthritis. Propensity score matching was used to control for confounders. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes were pain measured with a visual analog scale and hand function measured with the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire at 3 and 12 months. Secondary outcomes were complications, range of motion, grip and pinch strength, satisfaction with treatment, and return to work. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in visual analog scale pain (effect size, 0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.21 to 0.27) or the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (effect size, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.23 to 0.25) between the groups at 3 months or at 12 months. Furthermore, no differences were found in complication rate or in other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, shorter immobilization of 3-5 days of a plaster cast after Weilby procedure is equal to longer immobilization for outcomes on pain, hand function, and our secondary outcomes. These results indicate that shorter immobilization is safe and can be recommended, since discomfort of longer immobilization may be prevented and patients may be able to recover sooner, which may lead to reduced loss of productivity. Future studies need to investigate effectiveness of early active and more progressive hand therapy following first carpometacarpal joint arthroplasty.

Patients With Thumb-base Osteoarthritis Scheduled for Surgery Have More Symptoms, Worse Psychological Profile, and Higher Expectations Than Nonsurgical Counterparts: A Large Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Psychological characteristics, such as depression, anxiety or negative illness perception are highly prevalent in patients with several types of OA. It is unclear whether there are differences in the clinical and psychological characteristics of patients with thumb carpometacarpal (CMC-1) osteoarthritis (OA) scheduled for nonsurgical treatment and those with surgical treatment. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What are the differences in baseline sociodemographic characteristics and clinical characteristics (including pain, hand function, and health-related quality of life) between patients with thumb CMC-1 OA scheduled for surgery and those treated nonoperatively? (2) What are the differences in psychological characteristics between patients scheduled for surgery and those treated nonsurgically, for treatment credibility, expectations, illness perception, pain catastrophizing, and anxiety and depression? (3) What is the relative contribution of baseline sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological characteristics to the probability of being scheduled for surgery? METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study using observational data. Patients with CMC-1 OA completed outcome measures before undergoing either nonsurgical or surgical treatment. Between September 2017 and June 2018, 1273 patients were screened for eligibility. In total, 584 participants were included: 208 in the surgery group and 376 in the nonsurgery group. Baseline sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological characteristics were compared between groups, and a hierarchical logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the relative contribution of psychological characteristics to being scheduled for surgery, over and above clinical and sociodemographic variables. Baseline measures included pain, hand function, satisfaction with the patient's hand, health-related quality of life, treatment credibility and expectations, illness perception, pain catastrophizing, and anxiety and depression. RESULTS: Patients in the surgery group had longer symptom duration, more often a second opinion, higher pain, treatment credibility and expectations and worse hand function, satisfaction, HRQoL, illness perception and pain catastrophizing compared with the non-surgery group (effect sizes ranged from 0.20 to 1.20; p values ranged from < 0.001 to 0.044). After adjusting for sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological factors, we found that the following increased the probability of being scheduled for surgery: longer symptom duration (standardized odds ratio [SOR], 1.86; p = 0.004), second-opinion visit (SOR, 3.81; p = 0.027), lower satisfaction with the hand (SOR, 0.65; p = 0.004), higher treatment expectations (SOR, 5.04; p < 0.001), shorter perceived timeline (SOR, 0.70; p = 0.011), worse personal control (SOR, 0.57; p < 0.001) and emotional response (SOR, 1.40; p = 0.040). The hierarchical logistic regression analysis including sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological factors provided the highest area under the curve (sociodemographics alone: 0.663 [95% confidence interval 0.618 to 0.709]; sociodemographics and clinical: 0.750 [95% CI 0.708 to 0.791]; sociodemographics, clinical and psychological: 0.900 [95% CI 0.875 to 0.925]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients scheduled to undergo surgery for CMC-1 OA have a worse psychological profile than those scheduled for nonsurgical treatment. Our findings suggest that psychological characteristics should be considered during shared decision-making, and they might indicate if psychological interventions, training in coping strategies, and patient education are needed. Future studies should prospectively investigate the influence of psychological characteristics on the outcomes of patients with CMC-1 OA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Outcome of a Hand Orthosis and Hand Therapy for Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis in Daily Practice: A Prospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Initial treatment for symptomatic carpometacarpal (CMC) osteoarthritis (OA) of the thumb is usually nonsurgical. However, evidence on the effect of a hand orthosis and hand therapy for mid- and long-term results is limited, and it is unknown how many patients undergo additional surgical treatment. Therefore, the aim of this study is to describe the outcome of a hand orthosis and hand therapy for CMC OA in a large cohort study, and to evaluate the conversion rate to surgical treatment. METHODS: In this multicenter, prospective cohort study, patients treated with a hand orthosis and hand therapy for primary CMC OA between 2011 and 2014 were included. Pain (visual analog scale) and function (Michigan Hand Questionnaire) were measured at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, and at 12 months after the start of treatment. All patients converted to surgery were recorded between 2012 and 2016. Outcome was compared with baseline, and post hoc comparisons were made between patients who were not converted to surgery and patients who were converted to surgery after initially receiving a hand orthosis and hand therapy. Lastly, subgroup analysis was performed based on baseline pain levels. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 2.2 ± 0.9 years, 15% of all patients were surgically treated. In the group that was not converted to surgery, pain (visual analog scale) significantly improved from 49 ± 20 at baseline to 36 ± 24 at 12 months. The Michigan Hand Questionnaire score was essentially unchanged from 65 ± 15 at baseline to 69 ± 10 at 12 months. Post hoc testing showed that improvement in pain was only significant between baseline and 6 weeks, and thereafter stabilized until 1 year after the start of treatment. The group that converted to surgery did not show any improvement in pain and function at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients with thumb CMC OA who underwent hand therapy including an orthosis, 15% of the patients underwent additional surgical treatment. The patients (85%) who did not undergo surgery improved in pain and function, although only improvements in pain were significant and clinically relevant. Most improvement was seen in the first 6 weeks and stabilized till 1 year after the start of treatment. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.