A Willemien Visser1, Pernille Bøyesen2, Ida K Haugen2, Jan W Schoones2, Désirée M van der Heijde2, Frits R Rosendaal2, Margreet Kloppenburg2. 1. From the Department of Rheumatology, and Department of Clinical Epidemiology, and Walaeus Library, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway.A.W. Visser, MD, Department of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center; P. Bøyesen, MD, PhD, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; I.K. Haugen, MD, PhD, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; J.W. Schoones, MA, Walaeus Library, Leiden University Medical Center; D.M. van der Heijde, MD, PhD, Department of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center, and Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; F.R. Rosendaal, MD, PhD, Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center; M. Kloppenburg, MD, PhD, Department of Rheumatology, and Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center. a.w.visser@lumc.nl. 2. From the Department of Rheumatology, and Department of Clinical Epidemiology, and Walaeus Library, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway.A.W. Visser, MD, Department of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center; P. Bøyesen, MD, PhD, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; I.K. Haugen, MD, PhD, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; J.W. Schoones, MA, Walaeus Library, Leiden University Medical Center; D.M. van der Heijde, MD, PhD, Department of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center, and Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; F.R. Rosendaal, MD, PhD, Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center; M. Kloppenburg, MD, PhD, Department of Rheumatology, and Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Description of use and metric properties of instruments measuring pain, physical function, or patient's global assessment (PtGA) in hand osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Medical literature databases up to January 2014 were systematically reviewed for studies reporting on instruments measuring pain, physical function, or PtGA in hand OA. The frequency of the use of these instruments were described, as well as their metric properties, including discrimination (reliability, sensitivity to change), feasibility, and validity. RESULTS: In 66 included studies, various questionnaires and performance- or assessor-based instruments were applied for evaluation of pain, physical function, or PtGA. No major differences regarding metric properties were observed between the instruments, although the amount of supporting evidence varied. The most frequently evaluated questionnaires were the Australian/Canadian Hand OA Index (AUSCAN) pain subscale and visual analog scale (VAS) pain for pain assessment, and the AUSCAN function subscale and Functional Index for Hand OA (FIHOA) for physical function assessment. Excellent reliability was shown for the AUSCAN and FIHOA, and good sensitivity to change for all mentioned instruments; additionally, the FIHOA had good feasibility. Good construct validity was suggested for all mentioned questionnaires. The most commonly applied performance- or assessor-based instruments were the grip and pinch strength for the assessment of physical function, and the assessment of pain by palpation. For these measures, good sensitivity to change and construct validity were established. CONCLUSION: The AUSCAN, FIHOA, VAS pain, grip and pinch strength, and pain on palpation were most frequently used and provided most supporting evidence for good metric properties. More research has to be performed to compare the different instruments with each other.
OBJECTIVE: Description of use and metric properties of instruments measuring pain, physical function, or patient's global assessment (PtGA) in hand osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Medical literature databases up to January 2014 were systematically reviewed for studies reporting on instruments measuring pain, physical function, or PtGA in hand OA. The frequency of the use of these instruments were described, as well as their metric properties, including discrimination (reliability, sensitivity to change), feasibility, and validity. RESULTS: In 66 included studies, various questionnaires and performance- or assessor-based instruments were applied for evaluation of pain, physical function, or PtGA. No major differences regarding metric properties were observed between the instruments, although the amount of supporting evidence varied. The most frequently evaluated questionnaires were the Australian/Canadian Hand OA Index (AUSCAN) pain subscale and visual analog scale (VAS) pain for pain assessment, and the AUSCAN function subscale and Functional Index for Hand OA (FIHOA) for physical function assessment. Excellent reliability was shown for the AUSCAN and FIHOA, and good sensitivity to change for all mentioned instruments; additionally, the FIHOA had good feasibility. Good construct validity was suggested for all mentioned questionnaires. The most commonly applied performance- or assessor-based instruments were the grip and pinch strength for the assessment of physical function, and the assessment of pain by palpation. For these measures, good sensitivity to change and construct validity were established. CONCLUSION: The AUSCAN, FIHOA, VAS pain, grip and pinch strength, and pain on palpation were most frequently used and provided most supporting evidence for good metric properties. More research has to be performed to compare the different instruments with each other.
Authors: Jean-Yves L Reginster; Nigel K Arden; Ida K Haugen; Francois Rannou; Etienne Cavalier; Olivier Bruyère; Jaime Branco; Roland Chapurlat; Sabine Collaud Basset; Nasser M Al-Daghri; Elaine M Dennison; Gabriel Herrero-Beaumont; Andrea Laslop; Burkhard F Leeb; Stefania Maggi; Ouafa Mkinsi; Anton S Povzun; Daniel Prieto-Alhambra; Thierry Thomas; Daniel Uebelhart; Nicola Veronese; Cyrus Cooper Journal: Semin Arthritis Rheum Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Paola Siviero; Sabina Zambon; Federica Limongi; Maria Victoria Castell; Cyrus Cooper; Dorly J H Deeg; Michael D Denkinger; Elaine M Dennison; Mark H Edwards; Antonella Gesmundo; Ángel Otero; Nancy L Pedersen; Richard Peter; Rocio Queipo; Erik J Timmermans; Natasja M van Schoor; Stefania Maggi Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 10.995
Authors: Louise Klokker; Caroline B Terwee; Eva Ejlersen Wæhrens; Marius Henriksen; Sandra Nolte; Gregor Liegl; Margreet Kloppenburg; Rene Westhoven; Ruth Wittoek; Ingvild Kjeken; Ida K Haugen; Ben Schalet; Richard Gershon; Henning Bliddal; Robin Christensen Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-12-14 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Leticia A Deveza; David J Hunter; Anne Wajon; Kim L Bennell; Bill Vicenzino; Paul Hodges; Jillian P Eyles; Ray Jongs; Edward A Riordan; Vicky Duong; Win Min Oo; Rachel O'Connell; Sarah R F Meneses Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 2.692