Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Apr;5(4):153-61.
doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.54.2000462.

Are validated outcome measures used in distal radial fractures truly valid? A critical assessment using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist

Y V Kleinlugtenbelt  1 , R W Nienhuis  2 , M Bhandari  3 , J C Goslings  4 , R W Poolman  5 , V A B Scholtes  5
Affiliations

Are validated outcome measures used in distal radial fractures truly valid? A critical assessment using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist

Y V Kleinlugtenbelt et al. Bone Joint Res. 2016 Apr.

Abstract

Objectives: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are often used to evaluate the outcome of treatment in patients with distal radial fractures. Which PROM to select is often based on assessment of measurement properties, such as validity and reliability. Measurement properties are assessed in clinimetric studies, and results are often reviewed without considering the methodological quality of these studies. Our aim was to systematically review the methodological quality of clinimetric studies that evaluated measurement properties of PROMs used in patients with distal radial fractures, and to make recommendations for the selection of PROMs based on the level of evidence of each individual measurement property.

Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMbase, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases to identify relevant clinimetric studies. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of the studies on measurement properties, using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Level of evidence (strong / moderate / limited / lacking) for each measurement property per PROM was determined by combining the methodological quality and the results of the different clinimetric studies.

Results: In all, 19 out of 1508 identified unique studies were included, in which 12 PROMs were rated. The Patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) and the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH) were evaluated on most measurement properties. The evidence for the PRWE is moderate that its reliability, validity (content and hypothesis testing), and responsiveness are good. The evidence is limited that its internal consistency and cross-cultural validity are good, and its measurement error is acceptable. There is no evidence for its structural and criterion validity. The evidence for the DASH is moderate that its responsiveness is good. The evidence is limited that its reliability and the validity on hypothesis testing are good. There is no evidence for the other measurement properties.

Conclusion: According to this systematic review, there is, at best, moderate evidence that the responsiveness of the PRWE and DASH are good, as are the reliability and validity of the PRWE. We recommend these PROMs in clinical studies in patients with distal radial fractures; however, more clinimetric studies of higher methodological quality are needed to adequately determine the other measurement properties.Cite this article: Dr Y. V. Kleinlugtenbelt. Are validated outcome measures used in distal radial fractures truly valid?: A critical assessment using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:153-161. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.54.2000462.

Keywords: COSMIN; Distal radius fracture; PROM; Validation study.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

ICMJE conflict of Interest: M. Bhandari reports personal fees received from Smith & Nephew, Stryker, Amgen, Zimmer, Moximed, Bioventus, Merck, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Ferring, Conmed, as well as grants from Smith & Nephew, DePuy, Eli Lily, Bioventus, Stryker, Zimmer, Amgen, none of which is related to this article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Search strategy and selection of articles. *Nov 13, 2015. **Cinahl search includes PsycInfo database. HR-PRO, health-related patient-reported outcomes; DRF, distal radial fracture.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Court-Brown CM, Caesar B. Epidemiology of adult fractures: A review. Injury 2006;37:691-697. - PubMed
    1. Alffram PA, Bauer GC. Epidemiology of fractures of the forearm. A biomechanical investigation of bone strength. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1962;44-A:105-114. - PubMed
    1. Dóczi J, Renner A. Epidemiology of distal radius fractures in Budapest. A retrospective study of 2,241 cases in 1989. Acta Orthop Scand 1994;65:432-433. - PubMed
    1. Owen RA, Melton LJ, III, Johnson KA, Ilstrup DM, Riggs BL. Incidence of Colles’ fracture in a North American community. Am J Public Health 1982;72:605-607. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wei DH, Poolman RW, Bhandari M, Wolfe VM, Rosenwasser MP. External fixation versus internal fixation for unstable distal radius fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative clinical trials. J Orthop Trauma 2012;26:386-394. - PubMed