Search

Objective To compare and contrast clinician, patient, and caregiver perspectives to generate all important and salient items for a new scale to measure medical consequences relevant to adult patients with dysphagia. Study Design and Setting Six focus groups (three with clinicians, two with patients, and one with caregivers) were conducted with a total of 33 participants. Through the constant comparison method of Grounded Theory, analysis began with open coding and progressed with higher-order categorization to derive perceptions from differing vantage points. Results Three themes evolved: (1) clinicians, caregivers, and patients each limited the medical consequences of dysphagia to the same impairment domains: pulmonary, nutritional, and psychological; (2) these consequences were given the same priority by clinicians and caregivers, but patients ranked them differently; (3) within each impairment domain, few dimensions were derived by clinicians and many by patients. Patients were more elaborate in their descriptions of psychological consequences. Conclusions The use of qualitative methodology to generate different perspectives derived different content. Clinicians, caregivers, and patients all agreed on the importance of three domains but differed in their prioritization and specific issues. These findings provide the necessary foundation for development of a comprehensive tool to measure medical consequences among patients with dysphagia.

Objective The most widely used neck-specific measure in intervention trials is the 10-item Neck Disability Index (NDI), which is assumed to be a unidimensional interval scale, as shown by how NDI data are scored, analyzed, and interpreted. Our objective was to use modern measurement methods to test this assumption (and thereby to also test the validity of calculating summed scores and parametric statistics on NDI data) through Rasch analysis. Methods NDI data from 521 trial subjects with neck pain were fit to the Rasch model. We examined threshold ordering of NDI items, fit of data to model expectations, presence of differential item functioning, and whether or not the set of NDI items collectively measure a single construct, which is a requirement for calculating summative scores. Results There was a lack of fit of data to the Rasch model (χ2 = 140.35, 70 df; P < 0.001). Five items (personal care, lifting, headaches, work, and recreation) had disordered response thresholds. Differential item functioning was detected for age and sex. The NDI items did not contribute to a single construct. Unidimensionality and interval scaling were achieved by removing 2 of the 10 items (resulting in the NDI-8), and converting NDI-8 ordinal (paper) summative scores to NDI-8 interval (Rasch-weighted) scores. Conclusion As originally proposed and conventionally used, the NDI is not a unidimensional scale, and has only ordinal scaling. This raises fundamental doubts about the practice of calculating change scores and other parametric statistics on NDI data. A revised 8-item version provides unidimensional interval-level measurement of neck pain disability.

Objective We compared the minimal important difference (MID) values obtained by the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve approach using different strategies on four outcome measures to guide the optimal use of ROC curve. Study Design and Setting Studies of two psychometric scales (Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire [RQLQ] and Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire [CRQ]) and two clinimetric indices (Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index [PUCAI] and Pediatric Crohn's Disease Activity Index [PCDAI]) instruments provided prospective longitudinal data. The MID was calculated from 7- and 15-point global ratings of change dichotomized in multiple ways, using the ROC curve method. Analysis was performed twice: first, using only the two groups adjacent to the dichotomization point (e.g., including only patients who had a small vs. moderate change); and second, using the entire cohort split at the same cutoff (e.g., including both unchanged subjects with those with small change vs. those who experienced moderate or large change combined). Results Using the entire cohort, rather than just those with ratings adjacent to the dichotomization point, yielded more precise and sensible MID estimates. With one exception, high precision was obtained when using the ROC curve method for any cutoff on the rating scale. Conclusion When calculating the MID using the ROC curve method, the use of the entire cohort maximizes precision.

Introduction To better capture the extent of work disability following an occupational injury, clinical researchers are beginning to recognize the importance of considering not only levels of absenteeism, but also disabilities experienced while “at-work”. Although at-work disability measures are available in the literature, currently there is little insight on the selection of specific measures that may be best suited for a given population or situation. The objective of this study is to assess and compare the measurement properties of four self-report at-work disability measures in workers with shoulder or elbow disorders. Methods Study sample consisted of 80 patients attending a shoulder and elbow specialty clinic operated by the Worker Safety Insurance Board of Ontario. Internal consistency reliability, validity, and patient preference of four at-work disability measures were compared in a cross-sectional design. Selected measures included the work module of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Outcome Measure, Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ-16), Work Instability Scale for Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA-WIS), and Stanford Presenteeism Scale. Results All four measures demonstrated evidence of internal consistency reliability (alpha = 0.76–0.90) and construct validity, although only modest correlations against work-oriented constructs (r = 0.37–0.60) were observed. The RA-WIS was most preferred by respondents (44.6%) over the other measures. Conclusions Although no single scale stood out as clearly superior, the WLQ-16 was considered the best overall performer. Variable performance between the scales suggests some divergence in the way these measures conceptualize “at-work disability”, which may be important to consider when selecting instruments for future studies.

Bradykinesia, characterized by slowness and decreased amplitude of movement, is often considered the most important deficit in Parkinson's disease (PD). The current clinical rating of bradykinesia in PD, based on the motor subscale of the Unified Parkinson's disease Rating Scale (UPDRS-III), does not individually weigh the impairments in speed and amplitude of rapid alternating movements. We sought to categorize movement in PD to determine whether speed and amplitude have different relationships to current measures of motor impairment and disability. Categories of speed and amplitude (normal, slow/low, and very-slow/very-low) were ascertained using an electromagnetic tracking device. Amplitude was disproportionally more affected than speed in the "off" state. UPDRS-III and the Schwab & England disability scale were worst in patients with very impaired amplitude and best in patients with normal amplitude. A similarly graded relationship was not found for categories of speed impairment. The examiner clinical global impression of change mirrored "off" state amplitude but not speed categories. Levodopa, however, normalized speed to a greater extent than amplitude. Our observations suggest that amplitude and speed impairments may be associated with different functional aspects in PD and deserve separate clinical assessment.

Purpose This study evaluated patient-reported outcome and the factors associated with disability after an upper extremity nerve injury. We hypothesized that patients at least 6 months after injury would report considerable disability and that pain would be the strongest predictor of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score. Methods After research ethics board approval, the medical charts of patients with these inclusion criteria were reviewed: adults; presenting to a nerve surgeon; 6 months or greater after nerve injury. Patients completed the DASH questionnaire and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) as a routine part of the initial evaluation. These data were reviewed retrospectively to determine predictors of the DASH score. Results There were 84 patients (mean age, 39 years; SD, 14 years) with brachial plexus (n = 27) and peripheral nerve (n = 57) injuries. The mean time after injury was 38 months (SD, 47). For all SF-36 domains, the mean values of the nerve-injured patients were significantly lower than the normative data, indicating a lower health status. The mean DASH score was 52 (SD, 22) of 100. Significantly more disability was associated with more SF-36 bodily pain and with brachial plexus injuries. In the final regression model, SF-36 bodily pain, age, and nerve injured were significant predictors of the DASH score. SF-36 bodily pain accounted for 35% of the variance. Conclusions Substantial long-term disability (high DASH scores) was found in patients after nerve injury that was predicted by higher pain, older age, and brachial plexus injury. Further investigation of this pain and the associated factors may provide the opportunity for improved health-related quality of life. Type of study/level of evidence Prognostic II.

Study Design Cohort study. Objective To measure the prevalence and incidence of work absenteeism involving neck pain in a cohort of claimants to the Ontario Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (WSIB). Summary of Background Data According to workers' compensation statistics, neck pain accounts for a small proportion of lost-time claims. However, these statistics may be biased by an underenumeration of claimants with neck disorders. Methods We studied all lost-time claimants to the Ontario WSIB in 1998 and used 2 methods to enumerate neck pain cases. We report the prevalence and incidence of neck pain using 2 denominators: (1) annual number of lost-time claimants and (2) an estimate of the Ontario working population covered by the WSIB. Results The estimated percentage of lost-time claimants with neck pain ranged from 2.8% (95% CI 2.5–3.3) using only codes specific for neck pain to 11.3% (95% CI 9.5–13.1) using a weighted estimate of codes capturing neck pain cases. The health care sector had the highest percentage of claims with neck pain. The annual incidence of neck pain among the Ontario working population ranged from 6 per 10,000 full-time equivalents (FTE) (95% CI 5–6) to 23 per 10,000 FTE (95% CI 20–27) depending on the codes used to capture neck pain. Male workers between the ages of 20 and 39 years were the most likely to experience an episode of work absenteeism involving neck pain. Conclusion Neck pain is a common and burdensome problem for Ontario workers. Our study highlights the importance of properly capturing all neck pain cases when describing its prevalence and incidence.

Objectives To provide information for practitioners regarding the osteoporosis (OP)-related needs of patients who present with low-trauma wrist fractures and are at high risk of subsequent hip fracture. Design Prospective protocol, retrospective analysis. Setting Large urban teaching hospital, regional trauma center. Patients All outpatients (women > or =40 years; men > or =50 years) who sustained fragility fractures of the wrist between December 1, 2002 and June 30, 2005. Intervention Patients were evaluated by a coordinator and recruited to an OP program for education, diagnosis, and treatment. Patient demographic data were collected. A baseline questionnaire included fracture and OP risk history, sociodemographics, Osteoporosis Health Beliefs Scale, and Osteoporosis Self-Efficacy Scale. Main outcome measures Fracture history, OP risk factors, attitudes, and beliefs. Results Of 339 patients with wrist fractures, 286 had fragility fractures (mean age 64.8 years; 82% female) and met the age criteria. Seventeen percent of men and 36% of women with fragility wrist fractures had been previously diagnosed with OP or osteopenia; nearly all of them had been prescribed supplements, and two thirds had received aminobisphosphonate treatment for OP. Half of the patients had one or more risk factors for OP. Most patients were aware of OP, but few felt their fracture could result from OP. Bone densitometry completed on 55 patients in the first year indicated OP or osteopenia in 43 of 55 patients. Patients' health beliefs underestimated the seriousness of OP. Every patient with a fragility fracture of the wrist should understand that: (1) their fracture may be related to OP; (2) by having a fragility fracture, they are at higher risk for hip fracture; and (3) preventive treatment is effective and safe. Information should be partly gender specific. Patients who believe that weak bones didn't cause their fracture require additional attention to motivate them to undergo special treatment. Conclusions Intervention by the orthopaedic team to address potential underlying OP in patients with low-trauma wrist fractures should include directed patient education, testing, treatment with supplements and pharmacotherapy where indicated, and referral as needed.

Introduction We evaluated two modes of delivery of an inflammatory arthritis education program (“Prescription for Education” (RxEd)) in improving arthritis self-efficacy and other secondary outcomes. Methods We used a non-randomized, pre-post design to compare videoconferencing (R, remote using telemedicine) versus local (I, in-person) delivery of the program. Data were collected at baseline (T1), immediately following RxEd (T2), and at six months (T3). Self-report questionnaires served as the data collection tool. Measures included demographics, disorder-related, Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale (SE), previous knowledge (Arthritis Community Research and Evaluation Unit (ACREU) rheumatoid arthritis knowledge questionnaire), coping efficacy, Illness Intrusiveness, and Effective Consumer Scale. Analysis included: baseline comparisons and longitudinal trends (R vs I groups); direct between-group comparisons; and Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) analysis. Results A total of 123 persons attended the program (I: n = 36; R: n = 87) and 111 completed the baseline questionnaire (T1), with follow-up completed by 95% ( n = 117) at T2 and 62% ( n = 76) at T3. No significant baseline differences were found across patient characteristics and outcome measures. Both groups (R and I) showed immediate effect (improved arthritis SE, mean change (95% confidence interval (CI)): R 1.07 (0.67, 1.48); I 1.48 (0.74, 2.23)) after the program that diminished over six months (mean change (95% CI): R 0.45 (−0.1, 0.1); I 0.73 (−0.25, 1.7)). For each of the secondary outcomes, both groups showed similar trends for improvement (mean change scores (95% CI)) over time. GEE analysis did not show any meaningful differences between groups (R vs I) over time. Discussion Improvements in arthritis self-efficacy and secondary outcomes displayed similar trends for I and R participant groups.

Objective To examine the validity of both self-report of having had dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and self-reported DXA test results. Methods Participants were recruited in 2003 and 2004 from a population-based study of women aged 65–90 years examining osteoporosis management in Ontario, Canada ( N = 871). Women reporting having had a DXA were eligible and asked to report the results of their most recent test. Participant responses were compared against DXA reports obtained from physicians. Results We obtained 413 (81%) physician records among the 510 women who reported having had a DXA test. Of these, the positive predictive value for self-report of having had a DXA was 93%. The weighted kappa statistic for the agreement between self-report and actual DXA results was 0.42 (95% confidence interval = 0.34–0.49). Although 84% of those with normal bone reported this, only 29% of those with osteopenia and 62% with osteoporosis reported their results correctly. Self-report of a clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis was better among those with a low trauma fracture, yet underestimated osteoporosis prevalence by 24%. Conclusion There is minimal measurement error in self-report of having had a DXA test. Self-report of DXA results will underestimate osteoporosis prevalence and is not a good proxy for clinical diagnosis.

To determine if inequities in access to osteoporosis investigation [dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) testing] and treatment (bisphosphonate, calcitonin, and/or raloxifene) exist among older women in a region with universal health care coverage.Community-dwelling women aged 65-89 years residing within 2 regions of Ontario, Canada were randomly sampled. Data were collected by standardized telephone interview. Potential correlates of DXA testing (verified by physician records), and current treatment were grouped by type as: "predisposing characteristics," "enabling resources," or "need factors" based on hypothesized relationships formulated before data collection. Variables associated with each outcome independent of "need factors" identified inequities in the system.Of the 871 participants (72% response rate), 55% had been tested by DXA and 20% were receiving treatment. Using multiple variable logistic regression to adjust for need factors, significant inequities in access to DXA testing existed by age, health beliefs, education, income, use of preventive health services, region, and provider sex. DXA testing mediated access to treatment; 34% of those having had a DXA were treated compared with 2% of those who did not. Among women with osteoporosis, correctly reporting that their DXA test indicated osteoporosis and higher perceived benefits of taking pharmacological agents for osteoporosis were associated with treatment.Significant inequities in access to fracture prevention exist in a region with universal health care coverage. Improved access to DXA and better communication to patients of both their DXA results and the benefits of treatment has the potential to reduce the burden of osteoporosis.

Objective To determine the impact on a responder type analysis of using three published methods to obtain the minimally important difference (MID) on the conclusion of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Study Design and Setting Using data from an RCT of supportive-expressive group therapy (SEGT-intervention) vs. standard care (control) in women with metastatic breast cancer, we measured individual responsiveness to change according to three levels of predefined MID (0.2 SD, 0.5 SD, and 1 standard error of measurement) of the following six validated questionnaires: Profile of Mood States, Impact of Event Scale, Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale, EORTC Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Core-30, Mental Adjustment to Cancer, and a pain visual analog scale. The proportion of women improved by SEGT and the number needed to treat according to three levels of MID were calculated. Results There was no consistent difference in the net proportion of women improving with the SEGT vs. control arm according to the three different levels of MID. Conclusion The choice between different levels of distribution-based MID did not make an important difference in the net proportion of women improving with the SEGT. Future research should compare MID derived from clinical anchors, in particular patient opinions.

Workers' musculoskeletal disorders are often pain-based and elude specific diagnoses; yet diagnosis or classification is the cornerstone to researching and managing these disorders. Clinicians are skilled in pattern recognition and use it in their daily practice. The purpose of this study was to use the clinical reasoning of experienced clinicians to recognize patterns of signs and symptoms and thus create a classification system.Two hundred and forty-two workers consented to a standardized physical assessment and to completing a questionnaire. Each physical assessment finding was dichotomized (normal versus abnormal), and the results were graphically displayed on body diagrams. At two different workshops, groups of experienced researchers or clinicians were led through an exercise of pattern recognition (clustering and naming of clusters) to arrive at a classification system. Interobserver reliability was assessed (8 observers, 40 workers), and the classification system was revised to improve reliability.The initial classification system had good face validity but low interobserver reliability (kappa0.3). Revisions were made that resulted in a proposed triaxial classification system. The signs and symptoms axes quantified the areas in the involved upper limbs. The proposed third axis described the likelihood of a specific clinical diagnosis being made and the degree of certainty. The interobserver reliability improved to approximately 0.70.This triaxial classification system for musculoskeletal disorders is based on clinically observable findings. Further testing and application in other populations is required. This classification system could be useful for both clinicians and epidemiologists.

BackgroundBystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) improves the likelihood of survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), yet it is performed in only 30% of cases. The 2010 guidelines promote chest-compression-only bystander CPR—a change intended to increase willingness to provide CPR.Objectives1) To determine whether the Canadian general public is more willing to perform chest-compression-only CPR compared to traditional CPR; 2) to characterize public knowledge of OHCA; and 3) to identify barriers and facilitators to bystander CPR.MethodsA 32-item survey assessing resuscitation knowledge, and willingness to provide CPR were disseminated in five Canadian regions. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize response distribution. Logistic regression analysis was applied to assess shifts in intention to provide CPR.ResultsA total of 428 completed surveys were analysed. When presented with a scenario of being a bystander in an OHCA, a greater proportion of respondents were willing to provide chest-compression-only CPR compared to traditional CPR for all victims (61.5% v. 39.7%,pppConclusionsThis study identified gaps in knowledge, which may impair the ability of bystanders to act in OHCA. Most respondents expressed greater willingness to provide chest-compression-only CPR, but this was mediated by victim characteristics, skill confidence, and recognition of a cardiac arrest.

Objectives To examine whether a commonly used model of behaviour change, stages of change, is helpful in understanding osteoporosis treatment initiation in a cohort of fragility fracture patients. Study design This longitudinal cohort study used data from a provincial osteoporosis screening program targeting fragility fracture patients age 50 and over. Logistic regression was used to identify baseline factors associated with patients moving from the first, pre-contemplation stage at baseline to the more advanced stages of action/maintenance at follow-up, when treatment is initiated and maintained. Main outcome measure Patient’s stage-of-change readiness to accept osteoporosis treatment. Results At baseline, 91% of patients were in the pre-contemplation stage. Of these, 74.1% remained at the same stage at follow-up, 2.7% moved to contemplation and preparation while 23.2% moved to action/maintenance. The adjusted analysis showed that those who moved from pre-contemplation to action/maintenance were more likely to have a previous fracture OR 1.5 (1.1–2.0), history of oral steroid use OR 2.1 (1.3–3.5), higher perceived benefits to osteoporosis drug treatment OR 1.2 (1.0–1.3), perception of bones as “thin” OR 2.8 (2.0–4.0) and were less likely to perceive that they were taking too many medications OR 0.6 (0.5–0.9). Conclusions With the majority of patients in the pre-contemplation and the action/maintenance stages, our results suggest an existence of a two-stage model. The baseline factors that we identified can be used to predict which patients are less likely to initiate treatment, which in turn, can be used to inform post-fracture interventions and facilitate behaviour change.

Objectives This study sought to: (i) explore the impact of mood disorders (such as depression, bipolar disorder, mania, or dysthymia) and five age-related chronic physical conditions (arthritis, back pain, diabetes, heart disease, and hypertension) on presenteeism (as indicated by self-reported activity limitations at work), and (ii) examine how mood disorders interact with each physical condition to affect this work outcome. Methods Using Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) data, we modeled the relationships between self-reported restrictions at work and each health condition. We then calculated synergy indices (SI) for the interaction between mood disorders and each of the five physical conditions. Results All six health conditions were associated with presenteeism. The strongest association was observed for back pain [prevalence ratio (PR) 2.70, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 2.57–2.83] and the weakest for hypertension (PR 1.18, 95% CI 1.11–1.25). The unadjusted SI indicated no interactions between mood disorders and any of the physical conditions, while the adjusted SI indicated statistically significant interactions between mood disorders and each of the five physical conditions. The statistically significant adjusted interactions were in a negative direction, such that having a mood disorder concurrent with a chronic physical condition was associated with a lower burden of presenteeism than expected. Post-hoc analyses revealed that this unexpected finding was attributable to adjustment for other co-morbid health conditions, particularly arthritis and back pain. Conclusions Our results suggest that targeting chronic physical conditions or mood disorders may be productive in reducing presenteeism. The combined effect on presenteeism when the two types of conditions occur simultaneously is similar to the additive effect of these conditions when each occurs in isolation.

Objective.Systematic reviews often struggle with how to combine information when more than 1 instrument is used across studies being synthesized. Different techniques have been suggested based on frequency of use in the literature, or on consensus. We explore an approach blending 2 initiatives: OMERACT (Outcome Measurement in Rheumatology) and COSMIN (Consensus On Selection of Measurement Instruments), and investigate the effects of an evidence-based measurement approach on selection of outcomes.Methods.Readings were circulated to attendees registered for a preconference workshop on pain measurement. Three instruments were considered and exercises conducted to engage people in the content and measurement performance of these tools. Consensus was sought that an evidence-based approach could be created for selection of instruments for summary of findings (SoF) tables.Results.The blending of COSMIN and OMERACT approaches led to an evidence-based approach that depended both on a clear definition of target concept and a review of measurement performance of the instrument. Participants emphasized that conceptual clarity and practical considerations should come before measurement property results.Conclusion.Evidence-based approaches can be adopted for selection of instruments for SoF tables. A research agenda was formulated.

Objective.Indicators of work role functioning (being at work, and being productive while at work) are important outcomes for persons with arthritis. As the worker productivity working group at OMERACT (Outcome Measures in Rheumatology), we sought to provide an evidence base for consensus on standardized instruments to measure worker productivity [both absenteeism and at-work productivity (presenteeism) as well as critical contextual factors].Methods.Literature reviews and primary studies were done and reported to the OMERACT 12 (2014) meeting to build the OMERACT Filter 2.0 evidence for worker productivity outcome measurement instruments. Contextual factor domains that could have an effect on scores on worker productivity instruments were identified by nominal group techniques, and strength of influence was further assessed by literature review.Results.At OMERACT 9 (2008), we identified 6 candidate measures of absenteeism, which received 94% endorsement at the plenary vote. At OMERACT 11 (2012) we received over the required minimum vote of 70% for endorsement of 2 at-work productivity loss measures. During OMERACT 12 (2014), out of 4 measures of at-work productivity loss, 3 (1 global; 2 multiitem) received support as having passed the OMERACT Filter with over 70% of the plenary vote. In addition, 3 contextual factor domains received a 95% vote to explore their validity as core contextual factors: nature of work, work accommodation, and workplace support.Conclusion.Our current recommendations for at-work productivity loss measures are: WALS (Workplace Activity Limitations Scale), WLQ PDmod (Work Limitations Questionnaire with modified physical demands scale), WAI (Work Ability Index), WPS (Arthritis-specific Work Productivity Survey), and WPAI (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire). Our future research focus will shift to confirming core contextual factors to consider in the measurement of worker productivity.

International audience; OBJECTIVES:To assess the contribution of back-translation and expert committee to the content and psychometric properties of a translated multidimensional questionnaire.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING:Recommendations for questionnaire translation include back-translation and expert committee, but their contribution to measurement properties is unknown. Four English to French translations of the Health Education Impact Questionnaire were generated with and without committee or back-translation. Face validity, acceptability, and structural properties were compared after random assignment to people with rheumatoid arthritis (N = 1,168), chronic renal failure (N = 2,368), and diabetes (N = 538). For face validity, 15 bilingual people compared translations quality with the original. Psychometric properties were examined using confirmatory factor analysis (metric and scalar invariance) and item response theory.RESULTS:Qualitatively, there were five types of translation errors: style, intensity, frequency/time frame, breadth, and meaning. Bilingual assessors ranked best the translations with committee (P = 0.0026). All translations had good structural properties (root mean square error of approximation

Background and Purpose. Clinicians often are faced with questions about prognosis and outcome of shoulder disorders. The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of both change in disability and level of disability following physical therapy treatment. Subjects. The subjects were consecutive patients (n=361) who were receiving physical therapy for soft tissue shoulder disorders. Methods. Clinical response to physical therapy, which was measured using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) measure, was assessed over 12 weeks. The 28 independent baseline predictors included demographics, disorder-related and disability measures, medication use, clinical findings, and expectations for recovery. Multiple linear regression techniques were used. Results. Predictors of greater disability at discharge were: higher initial disability, therapist prediction of restricted activities at discharge, workers’ compensation claim, older age, and being female. Predictors of greater improvement in disability were: shoulder surgery, higher pain intensity, shorter duration of symptoms, younger age, and poorer general physical health (measured using the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey [SF-36]). Discussion and Conclusions. Prognostic factors differ depending on the format of the outcome. Only age was significant in both models. [Kennedy CA, Manno M, Hogg-Johnson S, et al. Prognosis in soft tissue disorders of the shoulder: predicting both change in disability and level of disability after treatment. Phys Ther. 2006;86:1013–1032.]

Background There is a need to more accurately enumerate workers with musculoskeletal injuries who make lost-time claims to workers compensation boards. The objective of this study is to develop an approach to more accurately enumerate these workers. Methods Lost-time claims to the Ontario Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (WSIB) were reviewed. Using neck pain as an example, nature of injury and part of body codes were identified to classify cases. Claims of a random sample of 434 claimants were reviewed. The proportion of claimants classified as having neck pain was computed. Results The proportion of claimants classified with soft-tissue injuries to the neck varied from 0.88 for codes including “neck/cervical region,” 0.69 for “back region” to 0.05 for those coded as “shoulder/upper arm.” Conclusions Restricting the enumeration of injuries to specific part of body codes can lead to a gross underestimation of the magnitude of soft-tissue disorders in epidemiological studies using workers' compensation data. The proposed approach leads to more accurate enumeration. Am. J. Ind. Med. 49:557–568, 2006. © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Background: Fragility fractures resulting from osteoporosis are common injuries. However, the identification and treatment of osteoporosis in these high-risk patients are widely reported to be inadequate. The goals of this study were to determine how many patients receiving inpatient or outpatient treatment for a fragility fracture could be identified and enrolled in a program for osteoporosis education, investigation, and treatment and receive appropriate osteoporosis care within the program. Methods: An Osteoporosis Exemplary Care Program was implemented to identify, educate, evaluate, refer, and treat patients considered to be at risk for osteoporosis because of a typical fragility fracture. System modifications included coordination among the orthopaedic unit, Metabolic Bone Disease Clinic, and nuclear medicine unit to provide a continuum of care for these patients. Barriers were addressed through ongoing education of physicians, staff, and patients to increase knowledge and awareness of osteoporosis. The percentages of patients previously diagnosed and treated for osteoporosis, referred for investigation of osteoporosis, treated by the orthopaedic team, and receiving appropriate attention for osteoporosis were calculated. Risk factors for osteoporosis were also assessed. Results: Three hundred and forty-nine patients with a fragility fracture (221 outpatients and 128 inpatients) who met the inclusion criteria and an additional eighty-one patients with a fracture (fifty-five outpatients and twenty-six inpatients) who did not meet the inclusion criteria but were suspected by their orthopaedic surgeons of having underlying osteoporosis were enrolled in the Osteoporosis Exemplary Care Program. More than 96% (414) of these 430 patients received appropriate attention for osteoporosis. Approximately one-third (146) of the 430 patients had been diagnosed and treated for osteoporosis before the time of recruitment. Two hundred and twenty-two of the remaining patients were referred to the Metabolic Bone Disease Clinic or to their family physician for further investigation and treatment for osteoporosis. Treatment was initiated by the orthopaedic team for another twenty-three patients. Many patients had risk factors for osteoporosis in addition to the fragility fracture; these included a previous fracture (forty-nine of 187; 26%), a mother who had had a fragility fracture (forty-two of 188; 22%), or a history of smoking (105 of 188; 56%). Conclusions: In a coordinated post-fracture osteoporosis education and treatment program directed at patients with a fragility fracture and their caregivers, >95% of patients were appropriately diagnosed, treated, or referred for osteoporosis care. To accomplish this, a dedicated coordinator and the full cooperation of orthopaedic surgeons and residents, orthopaedic technologists, allied health-care professionals (nurses, physical and occupational therapists, and social workers), and administrative staff were required.

Background and Objective Patient-specific quality of life indices show great potential, but certain conceptual and methodological concerns have yet to be fully addressed. The present study reviewed nine patient-specific instruments used in musculoskeletal disorders: the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), Juvenile Arthritis Quality of life Questionnaire (JAQQ), McMaster–Toronto Arthritis questionnaire (MACTAR), Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP), Patient-Specific Index (PASI) for total hip arthroplasty, Problem Elicitation Technique (PET), Patient Generated Index (PGI) of quality of life, Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), and Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life (SEIQoL). Study Design and Setting Each tool was evaluated for purpose, content validity, face validity, feasibility, psychometric properties, and responsiveness. Results This critical appraisal revealed important differences in terms of the concept underlying these indices, the domains covered, the item-generation techniques and the scoring (response scale, methods) in each scale. The nine indices would generate different responses and likely scores for the same patient, despite the fact that they all include patient-generated items. Conclusion Although the value of these indices in treatment planning and monitoring at an individual level is strong, more studies are needed to improve our understanding of how to interpret the numeric scores of patient-specific indices at both an individual and a group level.

The authors conducted a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) for the treatment of calcific and noncalcific tendonitis of the rotator cuff. Conservative treatment for rotator cuff tendonitis includes physiotherapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, and corticosteroid injections. If symptoms persist with conservative treatment, surgery is often considered. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy has been suggested as a treatment alternative for chronic rotator cuff tendonitis, which may decrease the need for surgery. Articles for this review were identified by electronically searching Medline, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) and hand-screening references. Two reviewers selected the trials that met the inclusion criteria, extracted the data, and assessed the methodological quality of the selected trials. Finally, the strength of scientific evidence was appraised. Evidence was classified as strong, moderate, limited, or conflicting. Sixteen trials met the inclusion criteria. There were only five randomized, controlled trials and all involved chronic (>/=3 months) conditions, three for calcific tendonitis and two for noncalcific tendonitis. For randomized, controlled trials, two (40%) were of high quality, one (33%) for calcific tendonitis and one (50%) for noncalcific tendonitis. The 11 nonrandomized trials included nine that involved calcific tendonitis and two that involved both calcific and noncalcific tendonitis. Common problem areas were sample size, randomization, blinding, treatment provider bias, and outcome measures. There is moderate evidence that high-energy ESWT is effective in treating chronic calcific rotator cuff tendonitis when the shock waves are focused at the calcified deposit. There is moderate evidence that low-energy ESWT is not effective for treating chronic noncalcific rotator cuff tendonitis, although this conclusion is based on only one high-quality study, which was underpowered. High-quality randomized, controlled trials are needed with larger sample sizes, better randomization and blinding, and better outcome measures.

Background and objective This study is based on secondary analysis of Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) data from a community sample over 55 years and total hip or knee arthroplasty samples presurgery and 1-year postoperative. Methods The WOMAC data were evaluated by Rasch analysis. Data were considered to fit the Rasch mathematical model for the pain and physical dimensions of the WOMAC if unidimensionality was confirmed by principle component analysis of the subscale and the residuals from the Rasch analysis, infit and outfit statistics were in the range of 0.80 to 1.20; if there was no differential item functioning based on gender or hip vs. knee subjects; and, if there was stability of the item logits across the three data samples. Results A three-item pain dimension (excluding night pain and pain on standing) and a 14-item physical dimension (excluding heavy domestic duties, getting in and out of the bath and getting on and off the toilet) fit the Rasch model based on these criteria. Conclusion In evaluating existing health status questionnaires using Rasch methodology, it is important to evaluate relevant patient samples and longitudinal data when the measure is intended to evaluate change in status. By these criteria, a modified WOMAC questionnaire fits the Rasch model and has interval-level scaling properties.

Objective The purpose of this study was to provide a review of the available classification systems and to describe the similarities and differences in the structure of these systems. Methods Classification systems of upper limb musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) were located via electronic database searches and researchers’ files. The classification systems were compared on the disorders they described and on the criteria presented for each disorder. Results Twenty-seven classification systems were found after title, abstract, or full article review of 1671 articles. The systems differed in the disorders they included, the labels used to identify the disorders, and the criteria used to describe the disorders. Conclusion Twenty-seven classification systems were found that described disorders of the muscle, tendon, or nerve that may be caused or aggravated by work. No two systems were the same.

Much debate exists about the stability of the sense of coherence measure. This study examined changes in sense of coherence (SOC), and the variables associated with these changes, over a 4-year period, in a representative sample of the Canadian labour force (n=6,790). Two methods were used to assess change in SOC: (1) Change outside of that which could be considered as indistinguishable from measurement error, and (2) Change of more than 10%, which was originally proposed by Antonovksy, the scales designer. Over the study period, 35.4% of the population reported changes in SOC outside the range we consider possible due to measurement error, with 58% reporting change greater than 10%. Unskilled occupations were associated with declines in SOC, with household income demonstrating a curvilinear relationship with decline in SOC in the female population only. None of the variables used predicted increases in SOC. Given the degree of change in SOC, and the representativeness of the study sample, we suggest that SOC has a large state component. Given this lack of stability, we recommend caution if using the SOC to represent a stable global orientation within a causal context.

The aim of this study was to examine the availability of diverse job accommodations (or flexible working arrangements) and to describe their use among people with systemic lupus erythematosus (lupus), as well as to examine factors associated with the use of job accommodations.A mail survey was sent to adult lupus patients receiving care from a lupus clinic based in Toronto, Canada. The survey assessed demographic information, self-reported disease activity, work history, workplace activity limitations, job strain, and the availability and use of job accommodations. Standard multivariable linear regression analysis was used to examine factors associated with the use of job accommodations.We received 362 responses of 604 mailed surveys (60% response rate). Participants who were employed within the last 5 years, but who were not currently working, were less likely than currently employed participants to report having had job accommodations available to them at their last place of employment. The use of job accommodations was reported by 70% of currently employed respondents and by 72% of those not currently employed. The most common job accommodation used was sick leave days. Factors positively associated with the use of job accommodations among those who were employed included higher levels of education, being diagnosed with fibromyalgia, at least 1 episode of short-term work disability, not belonging to a union, greater workplace activity limitations, and greater job strain.The use of job accommodations among people with lupus is common. Work context factors, such as workplace activity limitations and job strain, are the main factors associated with the use of job accommodations.

We examined fracture patients’ understanding of “high” fracture risk after they were screened through a post-fracture secondary prevention program and educated about their risk verbally, numerically, and graphically. Our findings suggest that messages about fracture risk are confusing to patients and need to be modified to better suit patients’ needs. The aim of this study was to examine fracture patients’ understanding of high risk for future fracture. We conducted an in-depth qualitative study in patients who were high risk for future fracture. Patients were screened through the Osteoporosis Exemplary Care Program where they were educated about fracture risk: verbally told they were “high risk” for future fracture, given a numerical prompt that they had a >20 % chance of future fracture over the next 10 years, and given a visual graph highlighting the “high risk” segment. This information about fracture risk was also relayed to patients’ primary care physicians (PCPs) and specialists. Participants were interviewed at baseline (within six months of fracture) and follow-up (after visit with a PCP and/or specialist) and asked to recall their understanding of risk and whether it applied to them. We recruited 27 patients (20 females, 7 males) aged 51–87 years old. Fractures were sustained at the wrist (n = 7), hip (n = 7), vertebrae (n = 2), and multiple or other locations (n = 11). While most participants recalled they had been labeled as “high risk” (verbal cue), most were unable to correctly recall the other elements of risk (numerical, graphical). Further, approximately half of the patients who recalled they were high risk did not believe that high risk applied, or had meaning, to them. Participants also had difficulty explaining what they were at risk for. Our results suggest that health care providers’ messages about fracture risk are confusing to patients and that these messages need to be modified to better suit patients’ needs.

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly used evaluating clinical care. Many measures used to assess operative hindfoot interventions vary in content, and some have not been psychometrically validated in this population. The purpose of this study was to compare measurement properties of 6 lower-extremity patient-reported outcome measures, and to evaluate their reliability and validity in light of patients’ preferences. Methods: Cross-sectional survey of 42 preoperative and 100 postoperative patients completed 6 lower-extremity outcome measures on 2 occasions: Foot Function Index (FFI), Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale (AOS), patient-reported items of the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society Questionnaire (AOFAS), Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA), as well as measures of preference, and symptoms. Results: Internal consistency was good to excellent for all scales and subscales (α = .84-.97; ICC [2,1] = .81-.96). Correlations between scales ranged from .50 (WOMACStiffness and FFIActivity Limitations) to .92 (LEFS and SMFAOverall, WOMACPain and AOSOverall, FFIOverall and AOFASOverall). Higher correlations occurred within instruments ( r = .97 AOSPain and AOSOverall) and between similar subscales from different instruments ( r = .91 WOMACPain and AOSPain). Construct validity showed moderate to high correlations to global ratings of Pain, Stiffness, and difficulty performing Daily Activities. The highest correlations ( r > .75) occurred between Pain and AOSOverall ( r = .84), stiffness and WOMACStiffness ( r = .81), and Daily Activities and AOSDisability ( r = .87). Patients rated instruments by preference. FFI, WOMAC, LEFS, and SMFA rated favorably for length. FFI, WOMAC, LEFS, and AOFAS rated high for understandability. FFI was rated by postoperative patients as most likely to capture change due to surgery. SMFA rated the best overall. Conclusions: Direct comparison of instruments revealed similarity between scales in construct validity and reliability. Patient preferences supported the use of these scales. Foot-specific instruments offered no clear advantage over lower-extremity instruments. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective comparative study.

Objective To examine work absenteeism, job disruptions, and perceived productivity loss and factors associated with each outcome in young adults living with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and juvenile arthritis (JA). Methods One hundred forty-three young adults, ages 18–30 years with SLE (54.5%) and JA (45.5%), completed an online survey of work experiences. Demographic, health (e.g., fatigue, disease activity), psychosocial (e.g., independence, social support), and work context (e.g., career satisfaction, job control, self-disclosure) information was collected. Participants were asked about absenteeism, job disruptions, and perceived productivity loss in the last 6 months. Log Poisson regression analyses examined factors associated with work outcomes. Results A majority of participants (59%) were employed and reported a well-managed health condition. Employed respondents were satisfied with their career progress and indicated moderate job control. More than 40% of participants reported absenteeism, job disruptions, and productivity loss. Greater job control and self-disclosure, and less social support, were related to a higher likelihood of absenteeism. More disease activity was related to a greater likelihood of reporting job disruptions. Lower fatigue and higher job control were associated with a reduced likelihood of a productivity loss. Conclusion Young adult respondents with rheumatic disease experienced challenges with employment, including absenteeism, job disruptions, and productivity loss. While related to greater absenteeism, job control could play a role in a young person's ability to manage their health condition and sustain productive employment. Greater attention should also be paid to understanding health factors and social support in early work experiences.

Objective.To assess the current state of reporting of pain outcomes in Cochrane reviews on chronic musculoskeletal painful conditions and to elicit opinions of patients, healthcare practitioners, and methodologists on presenting pain outcomes to patients, clinicians, and policymakers.Methods.We identified all reviews in the Cochrane Library of chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions from Cochrane review groups (Back, Musculoskeletal, and Pain, Palliative, and Supportive Care) that contained a summary of findings (SoF) table. We extracted data on reported pain domains and instruments and conducted a survey and interviews on considerations for SoF tables (e.g., pain domains, presentation of results).Results.Fifty-seven SoF tables in 133 Cochrane reviews were eligible. SoF tables reported pain in 56/57, with all presenting results for pain intensity (20 different outcome instruments), pain interference in 8 SoF tables (5 different outcome instruments), and pain frequency in 1 multiple domain instrument. Other domains like pain quality or pain affect were not reported. From the survey and interviews [response rate 80% (36/45)], we derived 4 themes for a future research agenda: pain domains, considerations for assessing truth, discrimination, and feasibility; clinically important thresholds for responder analyses and presenting results; and establishing hierarchies of outcome instruments.Conclusion.There is a lack of standardization in the domains of pain selected and the manner that pain outcomes are reported in SoF tables, hampering efforts to synthesize evidence. Future research should focus on the themes identified, building partnerships to achieve consensus and develop guidance on best practices for reporting pain outcomes.

The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for an instrument is a much sought after, but elusive figure. In this review we will highlight new findings in this area, including taxonomy of MCID, methods used to ascertain MCID, the perspective taken for evaluating importance, and other sources of variation for MCID values. In the end we believe the MCID will be a context-specific value rather than a fixed number. The review highlights the need to do methodological research in this area, especially concurrent comparisons between approaches, or across different patient groups. There are many faces to the MCID, it is not a simple concept, nor simple to calculate.

Study objective Much effort has been expended to understand what care experiences patients value in the emergency department (ED), yet little is known about which outcomes patients value after ED care. Our goal is to define outcomes of ED care that are valued by patients discharged from the ED, with the goal of informing the development of a patient-reported outcome measure for ED care. Methods We conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with patients recruited during their care at 1 of 2 EDs and interviewed in either English or French 1 to 9 days after their visit. Patients who were hospitalized were excluded. Interviews focused on perceived outcomes of care since the ED visit and expectations of care before the ED visit. We identified themes with standard descriptive content analysis techniques and a modified version of the constant comparative method, drawing on grounded theory methods. Results We interviewed 46 patients in English (n=38) or French (n=8). Participants with diverse reasons for seeking care appeared to value common outcomes from ED care that centered around 4 themes: understanding the cause and expected trajectory of their symptoms; reassurance; symptom relief; and having a plan to manage their symptoms, resolve their issue, or pursue further medical care. These themes were also reflected in the expectations participants recalled having when they decided to seek care in the ED. Conclusion The 4 outcomes defined constitute areas for improvement and will inform the development of an ED patient-reported outcome questionnaire. Consideration should be given to measuring patient-reported outcomes separately from patient experience.

Active surveillance of symptoms and disability due to musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) in working populations can map individual transitions in symptom intensity or disability level. Using repeat surveys, this study examined if aetiological risk factors for new symptoms or disability, measured by interference with activities, were similar to prognostic risk factors for subsequent outcomes of symptoms and disability. This paper reports on 379 Toronto newspaper workers who completed questionnaires in 1996 and 1997. Questions on pain/discomfort during the last year, episode frequency and duration formed the basis for constructing three mutually exclusive symptom levels: noncases (Level 1); mild cases (Level 2); and more severe or frequent pain cases (Level 3). A similar construction of overall interference levels was based on the frequency with which musculoskeletal pain/discomfort interfered with daily, recreational, social and family activities, or ability to do one's job during the previous 12 months. The last was also examined as work interference alone. Levels of symptoms were cross-tabulated by overall and work interference at the two time points and Markov models of transitions between states were formulated. Results indicate that period prevalence of symptoms and overall interference increased between phases, though only significantly for symptoms (Levels 2 and 3, 65.7–70.7%, p = 0.04), while work interference was unchanged (17.9–17.0%). Equivalent proportions of workers improved as worsened in symptoms (21.1 and 22.4%, respectively), overall interference (16.7 and 17.8%), and work interference (7.4 and 6.6%). The only significant predictor for those without work interference at time one was job tenure, which was protective against work interference (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.06, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.01–1.12). Among those who had more severe/frequent symptoms at time one, lack of improvement over time was predicted by longer job tenure (OR = 0.92 per year, CI: 0.87–0.97), greater psychological demands of work (OR = 0.65 per point, CI: 0.51–0.84) and marginally by greater upper extremity disability score. At time one, women with work interference were more likely to have persistent interference at time two (OR = 7.22, CI: 1.57–33.20). Suggestive findings included opposite effects of social support at work: reduced risk of development of new symptoms but increased risk of persistence at the highest symptom level.

Background, objectives, and aims: To provide treatment using a patient-centered care model, the provider must understand the needs and wants of the patient and ensure the patient has access to appropriate and necessary health information. The objective of this study was to determine what information is most desired by proximal humeral fracture patients following their injury. Methods: This qualitative study enrolled patients aged 60 years or older presenting with a proximal humeral fracture . Semi-structured interviews were conducted within one-month of injury and at 6-months post-injury. The interviews were transcribed, coded and analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Four themes (biomedical information, recovery, engagement opportunities and support available) emerged from the coded data. Within one-month post-injury, the most commonly identified themes were rehabilitation and support available. Six-months after the injury, the most commonly identified theme remained rehabilitation, while the second most frequently identified theme shifted to engagement opportunities. The biomedical information theme emerged infrequently at both interviews. Conclusions: Patient-centered care models for proximal humeral fracture patients could be improved by adapting to dynamic information concerns. While the effect of the injury on the patient’s rehabilitation remained the leading concern for the duration of the study period, secondary concerns did change over time. Providing germane information to patients at timely intervals supports patient-centered care , patient engagement and ultimately may improve patient care.

South Asian (SA) immigrants settled in the United Kingdom (UK) and North America [United States (US) and Canada] have low screening rates for breast, cervical and colorectal cancers. Incidence rates of these cancers increase among SA immigrants after migration, becoming similar to rates in non-Asian native populations. However, there are disparities in cancer screening, with low cancer screening uptake in this population. We conducted a scoping study using Arksey & O'Malley's framework to examine cancer screening literature on SA immigrants residing in the UK, US and Canada. Eight electronic databases, key journals and reference lists were searched for English language studies and reports. Of 1465 identified references, 70 studies from 1994 to November 2014 were included: 63% on breast or cervical cancer screening or both; 10% examined colorectal cancer screening only; 16% explored health promotion/service provision; 8% studied breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening; and 3% examined breast and colorectal cancer screening. A thematic analysis uncovered four dominant themes: (i) beliefs and attitudes towards cancer and screening included centrality of family, holistic healthcare, fatalism, screening as unnecessary and emotion-laden perceptions; (ii) lack of knowledge of cancer and screening related to not having heard about cancer and its causes, or lack of awareness of screening, its rationale and/or how to access services; (iii) barriers to access including individual and structural barriers; and (iv) gender differences in screening uptake and their associated factors. Findings offer insights that can be used to develop culturally sensitive interventions to minimise barriers and increase cancer screening uptake in these communities, while recognising the diversity within the SA culture. Further research is required to address the gap in colorectal cancer screening literature to more fully understand SA immigrants' perspectives, as well as research to better understand gender-specific factors that influence screening uptake.

Objective.The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter provides guidelines for the development and validation of outcome measures for use in clinical research. The “Truth” section of the OMERACT Filter presupposes an explicit framework for identifying the relevant core outcomes that are universal to all studies of the effects of intervention effects. There is no published outline for instrument choice or development that is aimed at measuring outcome, was derived from broad consensus over its underlying philosophy, or includes a structured and documented critique. Therefore, a new proposal for defining core areas of measurement (“Filter 2.0 Core Areas of Measurement”) was presented at OMERACT 11 to explore areas of consensus and to consider whether already endorsed core outcome sets fit into this newly proposed framework.Methods.Discussion groups critically reviewed the extent to which case studies of current OMERACT Working Groups complied with or negated the proposed framework, whether these observations had a more general application, and what issues remained to be resolved.Results.Although there was broad acceptance of the framework in general, several important areas of construction, presentation, and clarity of the framework were questioned. The discussion groups and subsequent feedback highlighted 20 such issues.Conclusion.These issues will require resolution to reach consensus on accepting the proposed Filter 2.0 framework of Core Areas as the basis for the selection of Core Outcome Domains and hence appropriate Core Outcome Sets for clinical trials.

Objective.At a previous Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) meeting, participants reflected on the underlying methods of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument development. The participants requested proposals for more explicit instrument development protocols that would contribute to an enhanced version of the “Truth” statement in the OMERACT Filter, a widely used guide for outcome validation. In the present OMERACT session, we explored to what extent these new Filter 2.0 proposals were practicable, feasible, and already being applied.Methods.Following overview presentations, discussion groups critically reviewed the extent to which case studies of current OMERACT Working Groups complied with or negated the proposed PRO development framework, whether these observations had a more general application, and what issues remained to be resolved.Results.Several aspects of PRO development were recognized as particularly important, and the need to directly involve patients at every stage of an iterative PRO development program was endorsed. This included recognition that patients contribute as partners in the research and not merely as subjects. Correct communication of concepts with the words used in questionnaires was central to their performance as measuring instruments, and ensuring this understanding crossed cultural and linguistic boundaries was important in international studies or comparisons.Conclusion.Participants recognized, endorsed, and were generally already putting into practice the principles of PRO development presented in the plenary session. Further work is needed on some existing instruments and on establishing widespread good practice for working in close collaboration with patients.

Outcome measurement is an essential component for defining the effectiveness of clinicians’ practice (Reiman 1988) and standardised measures make that job more consistent, comparable and valid (Cole et al 1994). Hand therapists have long recognised the need for the standardisation of outcome measures, particularly for performance-based measures such as strength testing (Mathiowetz et al 1985, Woody et al 1988) or joint motion. More recently there has been an increased interest in outcome measures that capture the patient's perspective of their status, and that are standardised. The DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) is a standardised outcome measure that could be used for this purpose (Hudak et al 1996, McConnell et al 1999). The DASH reflects the impact of a disorder in terms of physical function and symptoms, which are the two main reasons patients seek care for a disorder of the musculoskeletal system. The DASH is becoming widely used by clinicians and researchers (McConnell et al 1999). It is now important to revisit what we know about how well the DASH is able to measure what it purports to measure.The purpose of this paper is to review the research that has been done to date on the DASH outcome measure, and to describe the implications of this for future research and for clinical practice.

The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) outcome measure was developed to evaluate disability and symptoms in single or multiple disorders of the upper limb at one point or at many points in time. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the DASH in a group of diverse patients and to compare the results with those obtained with joint-specific measures. Methods: Two hundred patients with either wrist/hand or shoulder problems were evaluated by use of questionnaires before treatment, and 172 (86%) were re-evaluated 12 weeks after treatment. Eighty-six patients also completed a test-retest questionnaire three to five days after the initial (baseline) evaluation. The questionnaire package included the DASH, the Brigham (carpal tunnel) questionnaire, the SPADI (Shoulder Pain and Disability Index), and other markers of pain and function. Correlations or t-tests between the DASH and the other measures were used to assess construct validity. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and other summary statistics. Responsiveness was described using standardized response means, receiver operating characteristics curves, and correlations between change in DASH score and change in scores of other measures. Standard response means were used to compare DASH responsiveness with that of the Brigham questionnaire and the SPADI in each region. Results: The DASH was found to correlate with other measures (r > 0.69) and to discriminate well, for example, between patients who were working and those who were not (p

Data on the use of various therapeutic interventions among working populations at risk for musculoskeletal disorders are rare, despite the need for such information in assessing adherence to best practices. Using the results of a cross-sectional survey of newspaper workers who reported neck and upper limb pain or discomfort (n = 309), we describe the prevalence of a wide range of clinical and workplace interventions. Information/education, exercises, and physical treatments were the most common interventions, and work changes were less prevalent. Those with more frequent, longer-duration, and/or more severe symptoms more commonly reported visits to physiotherapists and health practitioners at work and use of physical treatments, medications, and devices. The multiplicity of interventions used pose evaluation challenges for occupational health practitioners and researchers.

Purpose Research into the meaning of illness has often focused on an individual's transition into a state of being ill, for example the adoption of a sick role. The question “Are you better?” addresses the transition out of this state and is fundamental to the patient–clinician relationship, guiding decisions about treatment. However, the question assumes that all patients have the same meaning for “being better.” The purpose of this study was to explore the meaning of the concept of recovery (getting better) in a group of people with upper limb musculoskeletal disorders. Methods Qualitative (grounded theory) methods were used. Individual interviews were conducted with 24 workers with work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb. The audiotaped interviews were transcribed and coded for content. Categories were linked, comparisons made, and a theory built about how people respond to the question “Are you better?” Results The perception of “being better” is highly contextualized in the experience of the individual. Being better is not only reflected in changes in the state of the disorder (resolution) but could be an adjustment of life to work around the disorder (readjustment) or an adaptation to living with the disorder (redefinition). The experience of the disorder can be influenced by factors such as the perceived legitimacy of the disorder, the comparators used to define health and illness, and coping styles, which in turn can influence being better. Conclusion Two patients could mean very different things when saying that they are better. Some may not actually have a change in disease state as measured by symptoms, impairments, or function.

With the increase in the number of multinational and multicultural research projects, the need to adapt health status measures for use in other than the source language has also grown rapidly. 1,4,27 Most questionnaires were developed in English-speaking countries, 11 but even within these countries, researchers must consider immigrant populations in studies of health, especially when their exclusion could lead to a systematic bias in studies of health care utilization or quality of life. 9,11 The cross-cultural adaptation of a health status selfadministered questionnaire for use in a new country, culture, and/or language necessitates use of a unique method, to reach equivalence between the original source and target versions of the questionnaire. It is now recognized that if measures are to be used across cultures, the items must not only be translated well linguistically, but also must be adapted culturally to maintain the content validity of the instrument at a conceptual level across different cultures. 6,11‐13,15,24 Attention to this level of detail allows increased confidence that the impact of a disease or its treatment is described in a similar manner in multinational trials or outcome evaluations. The term “cross-cultural adaptation” is used to encompass a process that looks at both language (translation) and cultural adaptation issues in the process of preparing a questionnaire for use in another setting. Cross-cultural adaptations should be considered for several different scenarios. In some cases, this is more obvious than in others. Guillemin et al 11 suggest five different examples of when attention should be paid to this adaptation by comparing the target (where it is going to be used) and source (where it was developed) language and culture. The first scenario is that it is to be used in the same language and culture in which it was developed. No adaptation is necessary. The last scenario is the opposite extreme, the application of a questionnaire in a different culture, language and country—moving the Short Form 36-item questionnaire from the United States (source) to Japan (target) 7 which would necessitate translation and cultural adaptation. The other scenarios are summarized in Table 1 and reflect situations when some translation and/or adaptation is needed. The guidelines described in this document are based on a review of cross-cultural adaptation in the medical, sociological, and psychological literature. This review led to the description of a thorough adaptation process designed to maximize the attainment of semantic, idiomatic, experiential, and conceptual equivalence between the source and target questionnaires. 13 . Further experience in cross-cultural adaptation of generic and diseasespecific instruments and alternative strategies driven by different research groups 18 have led to some refinements