How should we treat painful sensitivity in the hand? An international e-Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence synthesis suggests allodynia resulting from neuropathic pain has few interventions with clear effectiveness. As research continues to build this needed evidence base, expert consensus recommendations can address the conflicting approaches within current hand therapy practice. PURPOSE: This study aimed to develop consensus recommendations for the clinical management of allodynia from an international panel of hand therapists. STUDY DESIGN: This was an international e-Delphi survey study. METHODS: We recruited international hand rehabilitation experts to participate in an e-Delphi survey. Consensus was defined as 75% or more of participants agreeing with a recommendation, and at least 3 rounds of consensus building were anticipated. Experts were identified from 21 countries, and clinical vignettes describing a spectrum of patients with painful sensitivity in the hand were provided to elicit treatment recommendations. Initial recommendations were summarized, and consensus sought for clinical practice recommendations. RESULTS: Sixty-eight participants were invited, with 44 more added through peer nominations. Fifty-four participants from 19 countries completed the initial survey and were invited to participate in all subsequent rounds. Over 900 treatment suggestions were provided from the initial vignettes across domains, including sensory, physical, and functional interventions, education, and cortical representation techniques: 46 ultimately reached consensus. However, important discrepancies in justification (eg, why allodynia should be covered) and implementation of techniques (eg, desensitization, sensory reeducation) were identified as the consensus exercise progressed. CONCLUSIONS: Experts recommend individually tailored programs to treat allodynia using a variety of physical/movement, sensory-based, and "top-down" approaches; this is highly aligned with contemporary theories, such as the Neuromatrix Model of Pain. However, consensus was not reached on the justification and implementation of some of these approaches, reflecting the lack of a taxonomy and supporting evidence for tactile stimulation approaches in the current literature. Trials directly comparing the effectiveness of these approaches are needed.

Reliability, validity and responsiveness of composite finger flexion in patients with traumatic hand injuries: A clinical measurement study.

BACKGROUND: Composite finger flexion (CFF) is proposed to be a convenient alternative to total active motion (TAM) and total passive motion (TPM). Passive CFF (PCFF) may be useful for early monitoring in post-operative rehabilitation of traumatic hand injuries. PURPOSE: To determine whether active and passive CFF are reliable, valid, and responsive measures of hand motion and of higher utility to the tester. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational clinical measurement study. METHODS: Fifty hand injury patients were recruited from a hospital-based out-patient clinic. TAM, TPM, repeated measures of active CFF (ACFF) and PCFF, self-reported stiffness, patient reported wrist/hand evaluation (PRWHE) scores, and grip strength were recorded. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and standard error of measurement were calculated for inter-rater and test-retest reliability. Criterion and construct validity were assessed using correlation coefficients. Responsiveness was explored by calculating correlation coefficients of change scores, effect sizes, and standardized response means. Time taken to measure CFF and TAM/TPM was recorded to consider utility. RESULTS: The average age of participants was 47 years and 36% were female. Inter-rater and test-retest reliability estimates for ACFF and PCFF were excellent (ICCs = 0.95-98). Standard error of measurement values ranged from 0.21 to 0.33. The correlation coefficient for criterion validity between ACFF and TAM was -0.69; PCFF and TPM was -0.65; and ACFF and PCFF was 0.83. For construct validity, ACFF and TAM were similarly correlated with PRWHE. Correlations between changes in stiffness with ACFF and PCFF were 0.43 and 0.26, respectively. Effect sizes of ACFF and PCFF were small at 0.1 and 0.2. Time taken to measure CFF was much shorter than TAM/TPM. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study support the use of active and passive CFF as a reliable, valid, and efficient tool in the clinical setting. Further study is required to verify the responsiveness of CFF.

Assessing Validity of the Original and Rasch Versions of the Central Sensitization Inventory with Psychophysical Tests in People with Knee Osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent of agreement between the original Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) and the Rasch-calibrated version (RC-CSI) and to explore the association of both versions with psychophysical tests and their respective sensitivity and specificity. METHODS: Patients with knee osteoarthritis who were enrolled in a multicenter cohort study in Montreal, Canada, completed the original CSI, the RC-CSI, and psychophysical tests (i.e., pressure pain thresholds, temporal summation, conditioned pain modulation) according to standardized protocols. Bland-Altman analyses assessed the agreement between the original CSI and the RC-CSI; Spearman correlations and chi-squared analyses evaluated the association between the two CSI scores and the psychophysical tests. A CSI cut point of 40 and an RC-CSI cut point of 31.37 were used. Receiver operating characteristic curves and the resulting sensitivity and specificity with psychophysical tests were also analyzed. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-three participants were included (58.7% female, mean age of 63.6 years, and body mass index 31.9 kg/m2). The original CSI and RC-CSI mean difference, 3.3/8.2, t(292) = 8.84 (P < 0.001), was significantly different and indicated a small bias. Small but significant inverse correlations were found for the original CSI and RC-CSI scores with pressure pain thresholds at the forearm and patella, with variance explained ranging from 0.01 to 0.12. The largest area under the curve suggested cut points of 23 (CSI) and 25 (RC-CSI) with 80.9% sensitivity and 38.5% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Because of poor variance explained with psychophysical tests and high false positive rates, our results indicate that there is little clinical value of using either version of the CSI in people with knee osteoarthritis.

The effectiveness of biophysical agents in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome- an umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to summarize, synthesize, and integrate the evidence evaluating the effectiveness of biophysical agents compared to other conservative treatments, for the management of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). METHODS: This was an overview of systematic reviews (SRs). We searched several online databases and obtained SRs relating to managing CTS using biophysical agents. Two independent researchers screened and appraised the quality of the SRs using the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2 appraisal tool. We extracted information related to study characteristics as well as the effectiveness of biophysical agents for CTS, the effect sizes, and between-group significances. We categorized the information based on the type of biophysical agent. We also performed a citation mapping and calculated the corrected covered area index. RESULTS: We found 17 SRs addressing 12 different biophysical agents. The quality of the SRs was mainly critically low (n = 16) or low (n = 1). The evidence was inconclusive for the effectiveness of Low-level Laser therapy and favorable for the short-term efficacy of non-thermal ultrasound in improving symptom severity, function, pain, global rating of improvement, satisfaction with treatment, and other electrophysiological measures compared to manual therapy or placebo. Evidence was inconclusive for Extracorporeal Shockwave therapy, and favorable for the short-term effectiveness of Shortwave and Microwave Diathermy on pain and hand function. The corrected covered area index was lower than 35% indicating a low overlap of the SRs. CONCLUSIONS: The findings were based on low-quality primary studies, with an unclear or high risk of bias, small sample sizes, and short follow-ups. Therefore, no recommendations can be made for the long-term effectiveness of any biophysical agents. High-quality evidence is needed to support evidence-based recommendations on the use of biophysical agents in the management of CTS. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022319002, registered on 17/04/2022.

Interpretation and content validity of the items of the Hamilton inventory to evaluate outcomes in Persian-speaking patients with complex regional pain syndrome: A cognitive interview approach.

BACKGROUND: The Hamilton Inventory for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a multidisciplinary assessment tool to evaluate signs and symptoms in patients with CRPS, developed in the English language. PURPOSE: This study aims to translate and cross-culturally adapt this tool for Persian-speaking patients with CRPS. Furthermore, this study aimed to understand how 1) Persian-speaking experts and patients interpret and calibrate responses to items on the Hamilton Inventory and 2) compensatory strategies that might affect responses. STUDY DESIGN: A cross sectional study with cognitive interview method. METHODS: Ten health care providers and 10 patients with CRPS were interviewed using cognitive interviewing techniques (talk-aloud, semi-structured interview probes). All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A directed content analysis was done to analyze the interviews using a previously established framework. RESULTS: Overall, the items on the Hamilton Inventory were well received by participants. Areas, where questions were unclear to some participants were recorded and categorized into five themes: Clarity and Comprehension (100%) in item 1 from the health professional tool and (65%) from the eleven items of the patient-reported tool. Perspective modifiers of culture influenced the calibrations of items "I feel my condition has negatively affected my relationships." (12%) and "My symptoms affect my comfort level with intimacy." (20%) from the patient-reported tool. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study demonstrate that there is no need for substantive changes to the items of the Hamilton Inventory, as they tend to be understood by Persian-speaking experts and patients with CRPS.

How should we define and assess painful sensitivity in the hand? An international e-Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Painful sensitivity in the hand is commonly seen with neuropathic pain, interfering with daily activities including rehabilitation. However, there are currently several terms used to describe the problem and a lack of guidance on what assessments should be used. PURPOSE: To gather expert opinion a) identifying current and common terminology used in hand therapy, b) developing a consensus definition of hypersensitivity, and c) developing consensus guidance on how to best assess allodynia. STUDY DESIGN: International e-Delphi survey study. METHODS: We conducted an e-Delphi consensus study drawing on international experts in hand rehabilitation. We planned up to four rounds of consensus-seeking, defining consensus as 75% or more of participants agreeing with a definition or recommendation. Experts were identified from 21 countries, with the nomination of other experts encouraged for 'snowball sampling'. The first round included clinical vignettes describing 'painful sensitivity of the hand' and asked participants to describe how they would assess each case. Definitions for hypersensitivity, tactile hyperesthesia, and allodynia were also requested. RESULTS: We invited 68 participants: 44 more were added through nominations. Sixty-three agreed to participate and were sent the round one survey; 54 participants from 19 countries completed this survey and were invited to participate in all subsequent rounds. No two definitions of hypersensitivity were the same, while 87% of the definitions for allodynia and 78% for tactile hyperesthesia were concordant with a published taxonomy. Over 700 assessment items were proposed in round one: ultimately 38 items representing eight distinct constructs reached a consensus for assessing allodynia. CONCLUSIONS: Therapists definitions were consistent with an existing taxonomy for allodynia. Although hypersensitivity conceptualizations varied regarding the qualities of stimulus and response, a working definition was reached. Recommended assessments were relatively consistent internationally, holistic, and reflected a potential link between allodynia and central sensitization.

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.

Rasch analysis of the brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire in patients with thumb osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire (brief MHQ) is a 12-item self-reported measure of hand function for patients with hand disorders which has been validated using Classical Test Theory. Rasch analysis can provide more detailed psychometric information. The purpose of this Rasch analysis is to assess the psychometric properties of the brief MHQ for patients with thumb osteoarthritis, and to make recommendations for improvements to the questionnaire if needed.  METHODS: The Michigan Hand Questionnaire and demographic data were collected from 923 thumb osteoarthritis patients treated in specialized clinics for hand surgery and therapy in the Netherlands. Rasch analysis was performed on the 12 items of the brief MHQ using RUMM 2030 to assess the fit of the brief MHQ to the Rasch model. To determine fit, analysis of fit summary statistics, individual person fit and individual item fit were assessed. Threshold distributions were assessed to identify if any items required rescoring. The Person Separation Index was calculated to measure reliability of the questionnaire. Differential item functioning was assessed to identify item bias, and Principal Component Analysis was performed to identify unidimensionality and local dependence. RESULTS: The brief MHQ showed misfit (χ2 = 1312.5, p < 0.0001) with 6 items having disordered thresholds and 9 items requiring rescoring. After deleting 3 of the rescored items due to significant item fit residuals, the brief MHQ had an acceptable reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.79). Misfit to the model (χ2 = 49.6, p = 0.0001), multidimensionality (10.2% of t-tests were significant), and item bias from non-uniform differential item functioning for 7 items across many person variables were still found. CONCLUSION: Although no satisfactory solutions were found to correct the misfit to the Rasch model, it is recommended that the response options of the brief MHQ be rescored, and that items 6, 9 and 10 be removed. The lack of unidimensionality indicates that the items do not represent the singular construct of hand disability and that totalling the scores of the brief MHQ does not provide a valid measure of hand disability for people with thumb osteoarthritis. The 37-item Michigan Hand Questionnaire may provide a better assessment of hand disability for patients with thumb osteoarthritis.

Performance-based outcome measures of dexterity and hand function in person with hands and wrist injuries: A scoping review of measured constructs.

BACKGROUND: Dexterity impairments are common and disabling. Currently, there is no consensus on an operational definition to measure dexterity. PURPOSE: This review aims to provide an overview of constructs measured by performance-based outcome measures of dexterity and hand function (PBOMD) validated for use in persons with musculoskeletal hand and wrist conditions. STUDY DESIGN: Scoping review, with qualitative content analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO were searched from inception until November 2019. Three reviewers identified studies investigating the psychometric properties of PBOMD in persons with hand and wrist conditions. Original articles and manuals of validated PBOMD were obtained. Reviewers independently extracted and performed a content analysis of constructs comparing the theoretical concepts of dexterity and function. RESULTS: Twenty PBOMD were identified. PBOMD featured 1-57 tasks and 1-8 potential grasps patterns per tool. Description of the constructs measured indicated overlap between dexterity and hand function. In newer tools, there was a greater representation of daily activities to include domains like self-care and domestic life; and measurement of qualitative aspects of performance. Concurrently, there was less focus on mobility. The majority of identified tools (70%) used speed as the criterion evaluation of performance. None of the PBOMD evaluated dexterity associated with leisure activities or modern technologies like smartphones, nor measured the ability to adapt to changing demands when completing tasks. CONCLUSIONS: Hand function and dexterity are imprecisely defined and operationalized in PBOMD. Dexterity is a complex construct that current PBOMD incompletely captures. PBOMD often quantified as the speed of movement, ignoring other important aspects like accommodating environmental changes during task performance. Clinicians should consider tasks included in PBOMD, the quantification method, and each PBOMD's limitations when choosing PBOMD.

An Evaluation of the Structural Validity of the Work Limitation Questionnaire Using the Rasch Model.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the targeting, scaling, and structural validity of the Work Limitation Questionnaire (WLQ) using Rasch analysis. DESIGN: Secondary data analysis. SETTING: Tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: The data were sourced from an upper limb specialty clinic of injured workers using the convenience sampling method and from a national randomized controlled trial investigating 2 surgical options for rotator cuff repair by formal, randomized selection (N=315). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Work Limitation Questionnaire 25-item version (WLQ-25). The WLQ contains 25 items measuring a client's ability to perform specific job demands on a 5-point ordinal response scale ranging from 0 (difficulty none of the time) to 4 (difficulty all the time). The average of all 25 items is used as the total score, ranging from 0 to 4, where higher index scores indicate greater difficulty performing daily work. Subscales were used to assess time management, physical demands (PD), mental-interpersonal demands, and output demands. RESULTS: The Rasch analyses performed on the dataset included the test of fit of residuals, ordering of item thresholds, Person separation index, differential item functioning (DIF), dependency, and unidimensionality. The partial credit model was selected for the current Rasch analysis because the likelihood ratio test was significant at both the overall questionnaire and the subscale level (P<.001). The WLQ-25 did not fit with the Rasch model (χ2=1715.58; df=125; P<.001) and most of the thresholds were disordered. A series of steps were undertaken to improve the fit statistic, including item reduction (6 items) and response merging (9 items). DIF was absent in the revised scale based on sex, age, full- or part-time employment, and type of employment. Only 3 revised subscales, namely the PD, mental demands, and interpersonal demands subscales, demonstrated acceptable fit to the Rasch model. CONCLUSIONS: The WLQ-25 demonstrated substantial misfit from the Rasch model, which could not be fully mediated. The revised PD, mental demands, and interpersonal demands subscales could be used to assess these constructs.

Diagnostic accuracy of sensory and motor tests for the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common entrapment mononeuropathy of the upper extremity. The previous systematic review of the diagnostic tests for CTS was outdated. The objective of this study was to compile and appraise the evidence on the accuracy of sensory and motor tests used for the diagnosis of CTS. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase databases were searched on January 20, 2020. Studies assessing at least one diagnostic accuracy property of the sensory or motor tests for CTS diagnosis were selected by two independent reviewers. Diagnostic test accuracy extension of the PRISMA guidelines was followed. Risk of bias and applicability concerns were rated using QUADAS-2 tool. Any reported diagnostic accuracy property was summarized. Study characteristics and any information on the accuracy of the sensory and motor tests for CTS diagnosis were extracted. RESULTS: We included sixteen clinical studies, assessing thirteen different sensory or motor tests. The most sensitive test for CTS diagnosis was the Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test (with 3.22 in any radial digit as the normal threshold) with sensitivity from 0.49 to 0.96. The tests with the highest specificity (Sp) were palmar grip strength (Sp = 0.94), pinch grip strength (Sp from 0.78 to 0.95), thenar atrophy (Sp from 0.96 to 1.00), and two-point discrimination (Sp from 0.81 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence was inconclusive on which sensory or motor test for CTS diagnosis had the highest diagnostic accuracy. The results suggest that clinicians should not use a single sensory or motor test when deciding on CTS diagnosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018109031 , on 20 December 2018.

Tactile stimulation programs in patients with hand dysesthesia after a peripheral nerve injury: A systematic review.

STUDY DESIGN: This is a systematic review performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards. INTRODUCTION: Diverse approaches based on tactile stimulation are used in hand rehabilitation settings to treat touch-evoked dysesthesias. However, there is a lack of literature synthesis on the description and the effectiveness of the various approaches based on tactile stimulation that can be used for treating hand dysesthesia after nerve injury. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The purpose of the study was to summarize the current evidence on tactile stimulation programs for managing touch-evoked hand dysesthesia due to nerve injury. METHODS: The search was carried out on Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library databases. The selected studies had to present patients with touch-evoked dysesthesia after nerve injury who were treated with tactile stimulation approaches to reduce pain. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the methodological index for nonrandomized studies scale, as well as the risk of bias. RESULTS: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies present tactile stimulation interventions that are heterogeneous relative to the target populations and the intervention itself (desensitization versus somatosensory rehabilitation method). Painful symptoms appear to diminish in patients with touch-evoked hand dysesthesia, regardless of the tactile stimulation program used. However, the included studies present significant risks of bias that limit the confidence in these results. DISCUSSION: The evidence does not unequivocally support the beneficial effects of tactile stimulation to treat touch-evoked hand dysesthesia. CONCLUSION: Future studies with more rigorous methodological designs, such as randomized controlled trials, are required to verify the potential benefits of these approaches.

Content validation of the Kamath and Stothard questionnaire for carpal tunnel syndrome diagnosis: a cognitive interviewing study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is essential for directing appropriate treatment; and for making decisions about work injury claims. The Kamath and Stothard Questionnaire (KSQ) is a self-reported tool used for the diagnosis of CTS. Comprehensibility and comprehensiveness of this questionnaire are critical to diagnostic performance and need to be established. The purpose of the study was to describe how potential respondents, clinicians, and measurement researchers interpret KSQ questions in order to identify and resolve potential sources of misclassification. METHODS: Hand therapists, measurement researchers, participants with CTS, and a control group were interviewed using cognitive interviewing techniques (talk aloud, semi-structured interview probes) in Hamilton, Canada. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A directed content analysis was done to analyze the interviews using a previously established framework. FINDINGS: Eighteen participants were interviewed. Areas, where questions were unclear to some participants, were recorded and categorized into five themes: Clarity and Comprehension (52%), Relativeness (38%), Inadequate Response Definition (4%), Perspective Modifiers (4%), and Reference Point (2%). Respondents also identified several symptoms of CTS that are not covered by the KSQ that might be of diagnostic value, e.g., weakness and dropping items. CONCLUSION: The content validity of the current iteration of the KSQ was not established. The problematic questions identified in the study have been reported to have low specificity and negative predictive values in a previous quantitative study. The content validity issues identified may explain the poor performance. Recommendations were made to modify the wording of the KSQ and the potential addition of three new questions. Future studies should determine whether the modified questionnaire can provide better diagnostic accuracy and psychometric properties. The results of this study may assist in ruling in or out CTS diagnosis to a wide variety of target audience, such as hand specialists, physical and occupational therapists, as well as family doctors.

Reproducibility: reliability and agreement parameters of the Revised Short McGill Pain Questionnaire Version-2 for use in patients with musculoskeletal shoulder pain.

BACKGROUND: The Revised Short McGill Pain Questionnaire Version-2 (SF-MPQ-2) is a multidimensional outcome measure designed to capture, evaluate and discriminate pain from neuropathic and non-neuropathic sources. A recent systematic review found insufficient psychometric data with respect to musculoskeletal (MSK) health conditions. This study aimed to describe the reproducibility (test-retest reliability and agreement) and internal consistency of the SF-MPQ-2 for use among patients with musculoskeletal shoulder pain. METHODS: Eligible patients with shoulder pain from MSK sources completed the SF-MPQ-2: at baseline (n = 195), and a subset did so again after 3-7 days (n = 48), if their response to the Global Rating of Change (GROC) scale remained unchanged. Cronbach alpha (α) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1), and their related 95% CI were calculated. Standard error of measurement (SEM), group and individual minimal detectable change (MDC90), and Bland-Altman (BA) plots were used to assess agreement. RESULTS: Cronbach α ranged from 0.83 to 0.95 suggesting very satisfactory internal consistency across the SF-MPQ-2 domains. Excellent ICC2,1 scores were found in support of the total scale (0.95) and continuous subscale (0.92) scores; the remaining subscales displayed good ICC2,1 scores (0.78-0.88). Bland-Altman analysis revealed no systematic bias between the test and retest scores (mean difference = 0.13-0.19). While the best agreement coefficients were seen on the total scale (SEM = 0.5; MDC90individual = 1.2 and MDC90group = 0.3), they were acceptable for the SF-MPQ-2 subscales (SEM: range 0.7-1; MDC90individual: range 1.7-2.3; MDC90group: range 0.4-0.5). CONCLUSION: Good reproducibility supports the SF-MPQ-2 domains for augmented or independent use in MSK-related shoulder pain assessment, with the total scale displaying the best reproducibility coefficients. Additional research on the validity and responsiveness of the SF-MPQ-2 is still required in this population.

Evaluating a sensitive issue: reliability of a clinical evaluation for allodynia severity.

Purpose/Aim: Allodynia is a common feature of neuropathic pain with few validated clinical evaluation options. We identified a need to estimate the measurement properties of the standardised evaluation procedure for static mechanical allodynia severity popularised by the somatosensory rehabilitation of pain method, known as the rainbow pain scale. This study (www.clinicaltrials.gov. NCT02070367) undertook preliminary investigation of the inter-rater and test-retest reliability of the rainbow pain scale.Methods: Persons with pain in one upper extremity after Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, a peripheral nerve injury or a recent hand fracture were recruited for assessment of static mechanical allodynia threshold using calibrated monofilaments by two raters at baseline, and repeated assessment one week later.Results: Single measures estimates suggested inter-rater reliability was substantial for the rainbow pain scale [intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.78 (n = 31), p < 0.001]. Test-retest reliability was also excellent at with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.87 [n = 28, p < 0.001]. However, confidence intervals suggest the true values could be more moderate, with lower bounds of the 95% confidence interval at 0.60 and 0.74, respectively.Conclusions: This pilot study has generated preliminary support for the inter-rater and test-retest reliability of the rainbow pain scale. Future studies should seek to increase confidence in estimates of reliability, and estimate validity and responsiveness to change in persons with somatosensory disorders.

Persons with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Renegotiate Social Roles and Intimacy: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Persons with complex regional pain syndrome often experience allodynia, where touch is painful. Allodynia is associated with poor prognosis, but the impacts on roles, activities, social relationships, and intimacy remain unclear. There is a need to examine intimacy in complex regional pain syndrome from a lived experience perspective. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of cognitive debriefing interview data from 44 persons with complex regional pain syndrome who completed a patient-reported questionnaire. Using interpretive description and thematic analysis, we analyzed items and responses addressing allodynia, relationships, and intimacy. RESULTS: Two themes were developed to understand intimacy related to the pain experience: a renegotiated social identity and participation and a reinvented intimate self. These themes included elements of a) loss of control, b) loss of shared experiences, c) feeling that their condition was misunderstood, d) a need for self-preservation, e) altered self-concept, and e) the concept of intimacy is broader than sexuality. Our findings suggest that complex regional pain syndrome has pervasive impacts on relationships and intimacy that merit discussion with their health care team. CONCLUSIONS: Persons with persistent pain need to be supported in roles and activities that allow them to express intimacy in their everyday lives.

Allodynography: Reliability of a New Procedure for Objective Clinical Examination of Static Mechanical Allodynia.

OBJECTIVE: There is a need for reliable and valid clinical assessment tools for quantifying allodynia in neuropathic pain. Allodynography has been proposed as a useful standardized procedure for clinical assessment of mechanical allodynia. This study (www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT02070367) undertook preliminary investigation of the measurement properties of allodynography, a new standardized clinical examination procedure for mapping the area of cutaneous allodynia. METHODS: Persons with pain in one upper extremity after complex regional pain syndrome, a peripheral nerve injury, or who had recently experienced a hand fracture were recruited for assessment of static mechanical allodynia (based on perception of a 15g force stimulus delivered by Semmes-Weinstein monofilament #5.18 as painful) by two raters at baseline; the assessment was repeated one week later. RESULTS: Single-measures estimates suggested inter-rater reliability for allodynography was excellent at an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.97 (N = 12); test-retest reliability was also excellent at ICC = 0.89 (N = 10) for allodynography (P < 0.001 for both). Confidence intervals' lower bounds confirm inter-rater reliability as excellent (0.90) but were less definitive for test-retest (0.59). CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study supports the inter-rater and test-retest reliability of allodynography. Studies on larger samples in multiple contexts and reporting other measurement properties are warranted.

Measurement Properties of the SF-MPQ-2 Neuropathic Qualities Subscale in Persons with CRPS: Validity, Responsiveness, and Rasch Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to conduct classical psychometric evaluation and Rasch analysis on the Neuropathic Qualities subscale of the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire-2 utilizing scores from persons with complex regional pain syndrome to consider reliability and person separation, validity (including unidimensionality), and responsiveness in this population. METHODS: Secondary analysis of longitudinal data from persons with acute complex regional pain syndrome was utilized for analysis of the psychometric properties and fit to the Rasch model of the Neuropathic Qualities subscale. We followed an iterative process of Rasch analysis to evaluate and address data fitting challenges. RESULTS: Repeated measures from 59 persons meeting the Budapest criteria were used for analysis. Both item-total correlations and unidimensionality analyses supported theoretical construct validity; all convergent construct validity hypotheses were also supported. Responsiveness was demonstrated comparing baseline and one-year data at d = 0.92, with a standardized response mean of 0.97. Data were able to fit the Rasch model, but all Neuropathic Qualities items had disordered thresholds that required rescoring. Additionally, local dependency and differential item function were addressed by "bundling," suggesting that no further item reduction would be possible. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided preliminary support for the validity and responsiveness of the Neuropathic Qualities subscale in persons with complex regional pain syndrome. Rasch analysis further endorses use of the Neuropathic Qualities subscale as a "stand-alone" measure for neuropathic features, but with substantial background data transformations. Replication with larger samples is recommended to increase confidence in these findings.

Hand therapists' attitudes, environmental supports, and self-efficacy regarding intimate partner violence in their practice.

STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive, cross-sectional. INTRODUCTION: Intimate partner violence (IPV) may involve physical, psychological, or sexual abuse. Although hand injuries are reported as common sequelae of IPV, there is limited attention to this issue in hand therapy research reports or practice recommendations. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The primary aim is to describe the attitudes and beliefs of hand therapists (HTs) about IPV issues. METHODS: A sample of 189 HT completed a standardized survey investigating perceptions regarding issues pertaining to IPV. Areas addressed included self-efficacy (in dealing with IPV), perceived systemic support, victim blaming, professional role responsibility, and safety. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics while between-group comparisons evaluating the impact of prior IPV experience and demographic variables of gender, country, certified hand therapy, and occupation on questionnaire scores used Mann-Whitney U analysis. RESULTS: The majority of therapists (66%) had some prior experience with IPV. HTs reported neutral perceptions about self-efficacy (M = 2.9/5), client or personal safety (M = 3/5), and support systems available when addressing IPV in practice (M = 3/5). However, therapists considered intervening as part of their professional role (M = 3.8/5) and reported low levels of victim-blaming attitudes (M = 4.4/5). Those with firsthand IPV experience reported lower victim blaming (mdn = 4.9/5 vs 4.6/5, P = .02). Additionally, females were less likely to blame victims of IPV than males (mdn = 4.7/5 vs 4.3/5, P = .003). DISCUSSION: Although Hand Therapists believe their professional role includes addressing IPV, confidence to deal with IPV, access/awareness of resources and perceived safety were substantive barriers. CONCLUSION: Continuing research should identify effective tools to educate and assist therapists to identify and support victims of IPV in hand therapy.