Radiographic Thresholds With Increased Odds of a Poor Outcome Following Distal Radius Fractures in Patients Over 65 Years Old

© 2019 Purpose: Older patients (aged older than 65 years)appear to tolerate a great degree of anatomic deformity after DRFs; however, the threshold beyond which the deformity becomes unacceptable is unknown. The purposes of this study were to identify the acceptable threshold for radiographic parameters after DRFs in patients aged over 65 years according to a patient-rated pain and disability outcome measure and to determine whether baseline activity levels influenced these parameters. Methods: A cohort of 190 older adults (aged 65 years and older)with DRF were selected from an existing prospectively collected database. The influence of specific radiographic parameters (ulnar variance, radial inclination [RI], and volar-dorsal tilt)and baseline activity levels on 1-year Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE)scores was investigated. The odds ratio (OR)of a poor outcome according to a 1-year PRWE (cutoff score of ≥25)at various alignment thresholds was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Activity level (underactive vs active)was determined using the Rapid Assessment of Physical Activity survey. Results: Radiographic parameters for the cohort varied widely (mean ulnar variance, 1.9 ± 0.9 mm, range –2.4 to 8.0 mm; mean RI, 18.7°± 5.9°, range, 0.1° to 38°; and mean dorsal tilt, 4.5° ±11.9°, range –24.0° to 33.6°). Most of the cohort (n = 158, 83%)had a good outcome (mean PRWE, 14.4 ± 19.5). The OR of a poor outcome was significant for RI less than 20° (OR = 3.6; 95% CI 1.5–8.7)and dorsal tilt greater than 15° (OR = 5.3; 95% CI, 1.0–27.8). Malalignment on radiographs and a poor outcome according to PRWE were not significantly different in the underactive versus active subpopulations. Conclusions: This study provides alignment cutoffs that best discriminate adverse pain and disability patient outcomes after DRF in a cohort aged more than 65 years. This information can be used to counsel older patients about their increased likelihood of a poor outcome with RI less than 20˚ or a dorsal tilt greater than 15°. Further research is required to examine outcomes after applying these thresholds in a prospective manner to management decision algorithms for DRF in patients aged over 65 years. Type of study/level of evidence: Prognostic II

Development and usability testing of a web-based and therapist-assisted coping skills program for managing psychosocial problems in individuals with hand and upper limb injuries: Mixed methods study

© 2020 Folarin Omoniyi Babatunde, Joy MacDermid, Ruby Grewal, Luciana Macedo, Mike Szekeres. Background: Ineffective coping has been linked to prolonged pain, distress, anxiety, and depression after a hand and upper limb injury. Evidence shows that interventions based on cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) may be effective in improving treatment outcomes, but traditional psychological interventions are resource intensive and unrealistic in busy hand therapy practices. Developing web-based, evidence-based psychological interventions specifically for hand therapy may be feasible in clinical practice and at home with reduced training and travel costs. Hand Therapy Online Coping Skills (HOCOS) is a program developed to supplement traditional hand therapy with therapist-assisted coping skills training based on principles from CBT and the Technology Acceptance Model. Objective: This study aimed to describe the development and assess the usability of HOCOS to support hand therapists in the management of psychosocial problems. Methods: The ADDIE model (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation) of system design was applied to create HOCOS. The usability testing of HOCOS involved a 2-stage process. In the first step, heuristic testing with information and communications technology (ICT) experts was completed using two sets of heuristics: Monkman heuristics and the Health Literacy Online (HLO) checklist. The second step involved user testing with hand therapists performing a series of online and face-to-face activities, completing 12 tasks on the website using the think-aloud protocol, completing the system usability scale (SUS) questionnaire, and a semistructured feedback interview in 2 iterative cycles. Descriptive statistics and content analyses were used to organize the data. Results: In total, 4 ICT experts and 12 therapists completed usability testing. The heuristic evaluation revealed 15 of 35 violations on the HLO checklist and 5 of 11 violations on the Monkman heuristics. Initially, hand therapists found 5 tasks to be difficult but were able to complete all 12 tasks after the second cycle of testing. The cognitive interview findings were organized into 6 themes: Task performance, navigation, design esthetics, content, functionality and features, and desire for future use. Usability issues identified were addressed in two iterative cycles. There was good agreement on all items of the SUS. Overall, therapists found that HOCOS was a detailed and helpful learning resource for therapists and patients. Conclusions: We describe the development and usability testing of HOCOS; a new web-based psychosocial intervention for individuals with a hand and upper limb injuries. HOCOS targets psychosocial problems linked to prolonged pain and disability by increasing access to therapist-guided coping skills training. We actively involved target users in the development and usability evaluation of the website. The final website was modified to meet the needs and preferences of the participants

Early post-immobilization pain at rest, movement evoked pain, and their ratio as potential predictors of pain and disability at six- and 12-months after distal radius fracture

Background: Removal of immobilization is a critical phase of distal radius fracture (DRF) rehabilitation, typically occurring by 2 months post injury. This study examined the extent to which pain at rest (PAR), movement evoked pain (MEP), or the ratio between those (MEPR) assessed at 2-months after DRF predicts the occurrence of chronic pain or disability at 6- and 12-months after the injury. Methods: This secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study was done at the Hand and Upper Limb Centre (HULC), London, Ontario, Canada. A total of 229 patients with DRF (159 (69.4%) women) were included. Scores for the pain and function subscales of the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) were extracted for 2, 6 and 12 months after DRF. Logistic as well as nonlinear quartile regression examined whether PAR and MEP predicted the severity of chronic pain and disability at 6- and 12-months after DRF. Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve were plotted, where area under the curve (AUC) examined the accuracy of the PAR and MEP scores in classifying those who experienced chronic pain and disability. Results: Scores of ≥3 (AUC of 0.77) for PAR or ≥ 6 (AUC of 0.78) for MEP at 2 months after DRF predicted moderate to severe wrist pain at 6-months, whereas scores of ≥7 (AUC of 0.79) for MEP at 2-months predicted ongoing wrist disability at 6-months after the injury. The MEPR of 2 ≤ or ≥ 8 at 2-months was associated with adverse pain at 6-months and functional outcomes at 6- and 12-months (R-square = 0.7 and 0.04 respectively), but prediction accuracy was very poor (AUC ≤ 0.50). Conclusion: Chronic wrist-related pain at 6-months can be predicted by either elevated PAR ≥ 3/10) or MEP (≥ 6/10) reported at 2-months after the injury, while disability experienced at 6-months after DRF is best predicted by MEP (≥7/10) reported at 2-months. The ratio of these two pain indicators increases assessment complexity and reduces classification accuracy

Rasch analysis of the Patient Rated Elbow Evaluation questionnaire

© 2015 Vincent et al. Background: The Patient Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE) was developed as an elbow joint specific measure of pain and disability and validated with classical psychometric methods. More recently, Rasch analysis has contributed new methods for analyzing the clinical measurement properties of self-report outcome measures. The objective of the study was to determine aspects of validity of the PREE using the Rasch model to assess the overall fit of the PREE data, the response scaling, individual item fit, differential item functioning (DIF), local dependency, unidimensionality and person separation index (PSI). Methods: A convenience sample of 236 patients (Age range 21-79 years; M: F- 97:139) with elbow disorders were recruited from the Roth|McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Centre, London, Ontario, Canada. The baseline scores of the PREE were used. Rasch analysis was conducted using RUMM 2030 software on the 3 sub scales of the PREE separately. Results: The 3 sub scales showed misfit initially with disordered thresholds on17 out of 20 items), uniform DIF was observed for two items ( Carrying a 10lbs object from specific activities subscale for age group; and household work from the usual activities subscale for gender); multidimensionality and local dependency. The Pain subscale satisfied Rasch expectations when item 2 Pain - At rest was split for age group, while the usual activities subscale readily stood up to Rasch requirements when the item 2 household work was split for gender. The specific activities subscale demonstrated fit to the Rasch model when sub test analysis accounted for local dependency. All three subscales of the PREE were well targeted and had high reliability (PSI \u3e0.80). Conclusion: The three subscales of the PREE appear to be robust when tested against the Rasch model when subject to a few alterations. The value of changing the 0-10 format is questionable given its widespread use; further Rasch-based analysis of whether these findings are stable in other samples is warranted

Short-term sensory and cutaneous vascular responses to therapeutic ultrasound in the forearms of healthy volunteers

© 2014 Shaik et al. Background: Therapeutic ultrasound (US) is used for a variety of clinical pathologies and is thought to accelerate tissue repair and help with pain reduction via its thermal and nonthermal effects. The evidence on physiological effects of US on both sensory and vascular functions in humans is incomplete. Hence, the purpose of this study was to determine the short-term impact of two doses of US (3 MHz, 1:4, 0.25 W/cm2, 5 min; 1 MHz, continuous, 0.8 W/cm2, 3 min), on sensory and vascular responses in the healthy forearms. Methods: Twenty healthy subjects were recruited (mean age, 29.6 ± 8.8 years) for the study. Superficial blood flow (SBF) in the distal forearms was determined using the tissue viability imaging system. Sensory perception thresholds (SPT) were determined from ring finger (C7, C8) to assess A-beta (at 2,000 Hz) and C fiber function (at 5 Hz), using a Neurometer CPT/C device. Subject\u27s two hands were randomly allocated to group order (AB/BA). Scores were obtained before and immediately after the application of US and control. Differences in these were analyzed using repeated measures. Results: Both 3 MHz pulsed US and 1 MHz continuous US showed small to moderate (effect size = 0.12 to 0.68), statistically significant reductions in SBF (3 MHz, mean change = 2.8 AU and 1 MHz, mean change = 3.9 AU, p \u3c 0.05 respectively), skin temperature (2.5°C and 1.1°C, p \u3c 0.05), and SPT at 5 Hz (1.3 and 1 mA, p \u3c 0.05) across time. SPT at 2,000 Hz remained unaltered by all three conditions (p \u3e 0.05). Age and gender also had no effect on all outcome measures (p \u3e 0.05). Conclusion: This study demonstrated minor reductions in skin blood flow, skin temperatures, and C fiber perception thresholds immediately after 3 MHz, and 1 MHz US. The responses observed may have been due to a thermo-cooling effect of the gel or due to the direct effect of US on C fibers ofmedian and ulnar nerves. US had a negligible effect on A-beta fibres. This would suggest that future studies looking at physiological effects of US should move towards investigating larger dosages and study the effects in patient populations

A comparison of two headless compression screws for operative treatment of scaphoid fractures

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>The purpose of this study was to compare the interfragmentary compression force across a simulated scaphoid fracture by two commonly used compression screw systems; the Acutrak 2 Standard and the 3.0 mm Synthes headless compression screw.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Sixteen (8 pairs; 6 female, 2 male) cadaver scaphoids were randomly assigned to receive either the Acutrak 2 or Synthes screw with the contralateral scaphoid designated to receive the opposite. Guide wires were inserted under fluoroscopic control. Following transverse osteotomy, the distal and proximal fragments were placed on either side of a custom load cell, to measure interfragmentary compression. Screws were placed under fluoroscopic control using the manufacturer's recommended surgical technique. Compressive forces were measured during screw insertion. Recording continued for an additional 60s in order to measure any loss of compression after installation was complete. The peak and final interfragmentary compression were recorded and paired t-tests performed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The mean peak compression generated by the Acutrak 2 Standard was greater than that produced by the Synthes compression screw (103.9 ± 33.2 N vs. 88.7 ± 38.6 N respectively, p = 0.13). The mean final interfragmentary compression generated by the Acutrak 2 screw (68.6 ± 36.4 N) was significantly greater (p = 0.04) than the Synthes screw (37.2 ± 26.8 N). Specimens typically reached a steady state of compression by 120-150s after final tightening.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Peak interfragmentary compression observed during screw installation was similar for both screw systems. However, the mean interfragmentary compression generated by the Acutrak 2 Standard was significantly greater. Our study demonstrates that the Synthes headless compression screw experienced a greater loss of interfragmentary compressive force from the time of installation to the final steady state compression level. The higher post-installation compression of the Acutrak 2 Standard may be attributable to the greater number of threads throughout the entire length of the screw. The clinical significance of these results, are, at this point uncertain. We do demonstrate that a fully threaded design offers a more reliable compression that may translate to more predictable bony union.</p

Barriers, facilitators, preferences and expectations of joint protection programmes for patients with hand arthritis: A cross-sectional survey

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Objectives The objective of this survey was to investigate the barriers, facilitators, expectations and patient preferences regarding joint protection (JP) programmes in people with hand arthritis. Design Cross-sectional survey. Setting Tertiary clinic. Participants Patients with hand arthritis: Osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and other forms of arthritis. Primary and secondary outcome measures This study used a survey among people with hand arthritis. Descriptive statistics and percentages were reported for all the data about the barriers, facilitators and preferences around JP. Results A total of 192 patients consented to participate. Most of the patients (82%) were unaware of JP. Factors that may act as barriers to participation and were regarded as â a very big concern\u27 were: Cost of the programme (44%), time of offering the programme (39%), work commitments (36%) and having a centre/clinic close to the house (28%). Factors that may act as facilitators and rated as â extremely helpful\u27 were: Research that shows that JP works (26%) and having the centre/clinic close to the house (25%). An online format for JP was the most preferred option (54%). Half (46%) preferred a timeframe of 1 hour, three times per week and 44% preferred a 2-hour programme, for three times per week. Conclusions Awareness of the potential benefits of JP, and prior experience with JP programme were very low. Common potentially modifiable patient-reported barriers to participate in future JP interventions, included: Cost, work commitments, distance from home to clinic and times that the intervention were provided. These barriers might be addressed with free and accessible forms of delivery of JP, which may lead to better uptake and participation in JP programmes

Evaluation of the content validity index of the Australian/Canadian osteoarthritis hand index, the patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation and the thumb disability exam in people with hand arthritis

© 2020 The Author(s). Background: The Australian/Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index (AUSCAN), the Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (PRWHE) and the Thumb Disability Exam (TDX) are patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) designed to assess pain and hand function in patients with hand arthritis, hand pain and disability, or thumb pathology respectively. This study evaluated the content validity of AUSCAN, PRWHE and TDX in people with hand arthritis. Methods: This study enrolled participants with hand arthritis to rate the items of all 3 PROM in terms of relevance and clarity. The Content Validity Index (CVI) was computed for each item in each scale (I-CVI) as well as for the overall scale (S-CVI). Kappa was used to determine the inter-rater agreement among the raters. Results: Overall, 64 individuals with hand arthritis (27% with OA, 67% with rheumatoid arthritis and 6% with psoriatic arthritis) participated in the study. The I-CVI for all items and all scales were very high (I-CVI \u3e 0.76) and the modified Kappa agreement among the raters demonstrated excellent agreement (k \u3e 0.76). The S-CVI for all PROMs was very high for relevance (AUSCAN = 0.92, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.94; PRWHE = 0.85, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.88 and TDX = 0.87, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.89) and for clarity (AUSCAN = 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00; PRWHE = 0.95, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.97 and TDX = 0.91, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.94), respectively. Conclusions: This study demonstrated very high content validity indices for the AUSCAN, PRWHE and TDX; with strong consensus across raters. This augments prior studies demonstrating appropriate statistical measurement properties, to provide confidence that all three measures assess important patient concepts of pain and disability

Estimating osteoporotic fracture risk following a wrist fracture: a tale of two systems

© 2015, The Author(s). Summary: The WHO fracture risk assessment (FRAX) and Canadian Association of Radiologists and Osteoporosis Canada (CAROC) tools can both be used to determine an individual’s 10-year risk of osteoporotic fracture. However, these tools differ in their risk calculation. For participants fracture, FRAX provides a lower fracture risk estimate than CAROC resulting in fewer decisions to initiate therapy.Purpose: The purpose of the current report is to compare fracture risk prediction rates using the CAROC and the FRAX® tools.Methods: Individuals ≥50 years with a distal radius fracture resulting from a fall from standing height or less were recruited from a single orthopedic clinic. Participants underwent a DXA scan of their lumbar spine and hip. Femoral neck (FN) bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk factors were used to determine each participant’s 10-year fracture risk using both fracture risk assessment tools. Participants were categorized as low (\u3c10 \u3e%), moderate (10–20 %), or high (\u3e20 %) risk. Stratified by age (\u3c65 \u3eyears, \u3e65 years), the proportion of participants in each category was compared between the tools.Results: Analyses included 60 participants (mean age 65.7 ± 9.6 years). In those (n = 26), the proportion of individuals at low, moderate, and high risk differed between the FRAX and CAROC tools (p \u3c 0.0001). FRAX categorized 69 % as low (CAROC 0 %) and 3 % as high (CAROC 12 %) risk. For individuals \u3e65 years, almost all were at least at moderate risk (FRAX 79 %, CAROC 53 %), but fewer were at high risk using FRAX (18 vs. 47 %, p \u3c 0.0003).Conclusion: For participants 65 years were at moderate or high risk under both FRAX and CAROC and should at least be considered for pharmacotherapy

A randomized controlled trial of nonoperative treatment versus open reduction and internal fixation for stable, displaced, partial articular fractures of the radial head: The RAMBO trial

Background: The choice between operative or nonoperative treatment is questioned for partial articular fractures of the radial head that have at least 2 millimeters of articular step-off on at least one radiograph (defined as displaced), but less than 2 millimeter of gap between the fragments (defined as stable) and that are not associated with an elbow dislocation, interosseous ligament injury, or other fractures. These kinds of fractures are often classified as Mason type-2 fractures. Retrospective comparative studies suggest that operative treatment might be better than nonoperative treatment, but the long-term results of nonoperative treatment are very good. Most experts agree that problems like reduced range of motion, painful crepitation, nonunion or bony ankylosis are infrequent with both nonoperative and operative treatment of an isolated displaced partial articular fracture of the radial head, but determining which patients will have problems is difficult. A prospective, randomized comparison would help minimize bias and determine the balance between operative and nonoperative risks and benefits. Methods/Design. The RAMBO trial (Radial Head - Amsterdam - Amphia - Boston - Others) is an international prospective, randomized, multicenter trial. The primary objective of this study is to compare patient related outcome defined by the \u27Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score\u27 twelve months after injury between operative and nonoperative treated patients. Adult patients with partial articular fractures of the radial head that comprise at least 1/3rd of the articular surface, have ≥ 2 millimeters of articular step-off but less than 2 millimeter of gap between the fragments will be enrolled. Secondary outcome measures will be the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI), the Oxford Elbow Score (OES), pain intensity through the \u27Numeric Rating Scale\u27, range of motion (flexion arc and rotational arc), radiographic appearance of the fracture (heterotopic ossification, radiocapitellar and ulnohumeral arthrosis, fracture healing, and signs of implant loosening or breakage) and adverse events (infection, nerve injury, secondary interventions) after one year. Discussion. The successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the best treatment for stable, displaced, partial articular fractures of the radial head. Trial registration. The trial is registered at the Dutch Trial Register: NTR3413. © 2014Bruinsma et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd