Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand and Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaires: Exploring Responsiveness and Diagnostic Performance in a Sample of Outpatients with and without Hand and Wrist Complaints

• Autor(a) principal: Moraes,Vinícius Ynoe de
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Outros Autores: Faria,Jamile Caroline Velasques, Fernandes,Marcela, Raduan-Neto,Jorge, Okamura,Aldo, Belloti,João Carlos
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162022000300449
• topic: hand trauma/surgery; shoulder; arm; disability assessment; surveys and questionnaires

Abstract Objective The present study aimed to verify whether, in an adult population with nontraumatic complaints in the upper limbs, (1) the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) are susceptible to a “ceiling effect” when compared with a sample of healthy subjects; and (2) to determine cutoff points for diagnostic performance and the intercorrelation for DASH and MHQ in both samples. Methods This was a prospective, comparative, nonrandomized study. In total, 150 subjects were included, with 75 in the case group (with disease) and 75 in the control group (without disease). This was a sample of patients recently admitted to a hand surgery outpatient clinic. Controls were matched to clinical cases according to inclusion. The ceiling effect was determined by a maximum response rate (> 15%); receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves determined cutoff points for sickness definition, and DASH and MHQ sensitivity and specificity. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results The DASH and MHQ questionnaires had no ceiling effect for the case group. In this group, 18 (24%) patients had the maximum DASH score, but none (0%) had the maximum MHQ score. For the control group, 1 (1.33%) subject had the maximum DASH score, but none scored for MHQ. For case determination, DASH scores of 7.1 had 80% sensitivity and 60.3% specificity, whereas MHQ scores of 76.9 had 56.2% sensitivity and 97.3% specificity. Conclusion The DASH and MHQ questionnaires are reliable tools to measure the impact of hand and wrist morbidities on daily activities, and they are not susceptible to ceiling effects. The DASH questionnaire is more sensitive for patient identification, whereas the MHQ is more specific. As such, the MHQ seems more appropriate when a more specific functional increase is expected.