What are we measuring? A critique of range of motion methods currently in use for Dupuytren's disease and recommendations for practice

Background: Range of motion is the most frequently reported measure used in practice to evaluate outcomes. A goniometer is the most reliable tool to assess range of motion yet, the lack of consistency in reporting prevents comparison between studies. The aim of this study is to identify how range of motion is currently assessed and reported in Dupuytren’s disease literature. Following analysis recommendations for practice will be made to enable consistency in future studies for comparability. This paper highlights the variation in range of motion reporting in Dupuytren’s disease. Methods: A Participants, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes and Study design format was used for the search strategy and search terms. Surgery, needle fasciotomy or collagenase injection for primary or recurrent Dupuytren’s disease in adults were included if outcomes were monitored using range of motion to record change. A literature search was performed in May 2013 using subject heading and free-text terms to also capture electronic publications ahead of print. In total 638 publications were identified and following screening 90 articles met the inclusion criteria. Data was extracted and entered onto a spreadsheet for analysis. A thematic analysis was carried out to establish any duplication, resulting in the final range of motion measures identified. Results: Range of motion measurement lacked clarity, with goniometry reportedly used in only 43 of the 90 studies, 16 stated the use of a range of motion protocol. A total of 24 different descriptors were identified describing range of motion in the 90 studies. While some studies reported active range of motion, others reported passive or were unclear. Eight of the 24 categories were identified through thematic analysis as possibly describing the same measure, ‘lack of joint extension’ and accounted for the most frequently used. Conclusions: Published studies lacked clarity in reporting range of motion, preventing data comparison and meta-analysis. Percentage change lacks context and without access to raw data, does not allow direct comparison of baseline characteristics. A clear description of what is being measured within each study was required. It is recommended that range of motion measuring and reporting for Dupuytren’s disease requires consistency to address issues that fall into 3 main categories:- Definition of terms Protocol statement Outcome reportin

Optimal functional outcome measures for assessing treatment for Dupuytren's disease: A systematic review and recommendations for future practice

This article is available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund. Copyright © 2013 Ball et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.Background: Dupuytren's disease of the hand is a common condition affecting the palmar fascia, resulting in progressive flexion deformities of the digits and hence limitation of hand function. The optimal treatment remains unclear as outcomes studies have used a variety of measures for assessment. Methods: A literature search was performed for all publications describing surgical treatment, percutaneous needle aponeurotomy or collagenase injection for primary or recurrent Dupuytren’s disease where outcomes had been monitored using functional measures. Results: Ninety-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two studies reported outcomes using patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) ranging from validated questionnaires to self-reported measures for return to work and self-rated disability. The Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score was the most utilised patient-reported function measure (n=11). Patient satisfaction was reported by eighteen studies but no single method was used consistently. Range of movement was the most frequent physical measure and was reported in all 91 studies. However, the methods of measurement and reporting varied, with seventeen different techniques being used. Other physical measures included grip and pinch strength and sensibility, again with variations in measurement protocols. The mean follow-up time ranged from 2 weeks to 17 years. Conclusions: There is little consistency in the reporting of outcomes for interventions in patients with Dupuytren’s disease, making it impossible to compare the efficacy of different treatment modalities. Although there are limitations to the existing generic patient reported outcomes measures, a combination of these together with a disease-specific questionnaire, and physical measures of active and passive individual joint Range of movement (ROM), grip and sensibility using standardised protocols should be used for future outcomes studies. As Dupuytren’s disease tends to recur following treatment as well as extend to involve other areas of the hand, follow-up times should be standardised and designed to capture both short and long term outcomes

Recent Surgical and Medical Advances in the Treatment of Dupuytren’s Disease - A Systematic Review of the Literature

Dupuytren’s disease (DD) is a type of fibromatosis which progressively results in the shortening and thickening of the fibrous tissue of the palmar fascia. This condition which predominantly affects white-northern Europeans has been identified since 1614. DD can affect certain activities of daily living such as face washing, combing hair and putting hand in a glove. The origin of Dupuytren’s contracture is still unknown, but there are a number of treatments that doctors have come across throughout the years. Historically surgery has been the mainstay treatment for DD but not the only one. The objective is to make a structured review of the most recent advances in treatment of DD including the surgical and medical interventions. We have looked at the most relevant published articles regarding the various treatment options for DD. This review has taken 55 articles into consideration which have met the inclusion criteria. The most recent treatments used are multi-needle aponeurotomy, extensive percutaneous aponeurotomy and lipografting, injecting collagenase Clostridium histolyticum, INF-gamma and shockwave therapy as well as radiotherapy. Each of these treatments has certain advantages and drawbacks and cannot be used for every patient. In order to prevent this condition, spending more time and money in the topic is required to reach better and more consistent treatments and ultimately to eradicate this disease

Recurrence of Dupuytren’s contracture: A consensus-based definition

Purpose: One of the major determinants of Dupyutren disease (DD) treatment efficacy is recurrence of the contracture. Unfortunately, lack of agreement in the literature on what constitutes recurrence makes it nearly impossible to compare the multiple treatments alternatives available today. The aim of this study is to bring an unbiased pool of experts to agree upon what would be considered a recurrence of DD after treatment; and from that consensus establish a much-needed definition for DD recurrence. Methods: To reach an expert consensus on the definition of recurrence we used the Delphi method and invited 43 Dupuytren’s research and treatment experts from 10 countries to participate by answering a series of questionnaire rounds. After each round the answers were analyzed and the experts received a feedback report with another questionnaire round to further hone in of the definition. We defined consensus when at least 70% of the experts agreed on a topic. Results: Twenty-one experts agreed to participate in this study. After four consensus rounds, we agreed that DD recurrence should be defined as “more than 20 degrees of contracture recurrence in any treated joint at one year post-treatment compared to six weeks post-treatment”. In addition, “recurrence should be reported individually for every treated joint” and afterwards measurements should be repeated and reported yearly. Conclusion: This study provides the most comprehensive to date definition of what should be considered recurrence of DD. These standardized criteria should allow us to better evaluate the many treatment alternatives

A new icriodontid conodont cluster with specific mesowear supports an alternative apparatus motion model for Icriodontidae

Increasing numbers of conodont discoveries with soft tissue preservation, natural assemblages and fused clusters of the hard tissue have strengthened the hypothesis regarding the function and mechanism of the conodont feeding apparatus. Exceptional fossil preservation serves as a solid basis for modern reconstructions of the conodont apparatus illustrating the complex interplay of the single apparatus elements. Reliable published models concern the ozarkodinid apparatus of Pennsylvanian and Early Triassic conodonts. Recognition of microwear and mammal-like occlusion, especially of platform elements belonging to individuals of the genus Idiognathodus, allows rotational closure to be interpreted as the crushing mechanism of ozarkodinid platform (P1) elements. Here we describe a new icriodontid conodont cluster of Caudicriodus woschmidti that consists of one pair of icriodontan (I) and 10 pairs of coniform (C1\ue2\u80\u935) elements, with I elements being preserved in interlocking position. The special kind of element arrangement within the fused cluster provides new insights into icriodontid apparatus reconstruction and notation of elements. However, orientation of coniform elements is limited to a certain degree by possible preservational bias. Four possible apparatus models are introduced and discussed. Recognition of specific wear on denticle tips of one of the icriodontan elements forms the basis for an alternative hypothesis of apparatus motion. Analysis of tip wear suggests a horizontal, slightly elliptical motion of opposed, antagonistically operating I elements. This is supported by similar tip wear from much better preserved, but isolated, elements of Middle Devonian icriodontids. More detailed interpretation of the masticatory movement will allow enhanced understanding of anatomical specifications, diet and palaeobiology of different euconodont groups