BackgroundThe Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) was developed as a wrist joint specific measure of pain and disability and evidence of sound validity has been accumulated through classical psychometric methods. Rasch analysis (RA) has been endorsed as a newer method for analyzing the clinical measurement properties of self-report outcome measures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the PRWE using Rasch modeling.MethodsWe employed the Rasch model to assess overall fit, response scaling, individual item fit, differential item functioning (DIF), local dependency, unidimensionality and person separation index (PSI). A convenience sample of 382 patients with distal radius fracture was recruited from the hand and upper limb clinic at large academic healthcare organization, London, Ontario, Canada, 6-month post-injury scores of the PRWE was used. RA was conducted on the 3 subscales (pain, specific activities, and usual activities) of the PRWE separately.ResultsThe pain subscale adequately fit the Rasch model when item 4 “Pain - When it is at its worst” was deleted to eliminate non-uniform DIF by age group, and item 5 “How often do you have pain” was rescored by collapsing into 8 intervals to eliminate disordered thresholds. Uniform DIF for “Use my affected hand to push up from the chair” (by work status) and “Use bathroom tissue with my affected hand” (by injured hand) was addressed by splitting the items for analysis. After background rescoring of 2 items in pain subscale, 2 items in specific activities and 3 items in usual activities, all three subscales of the PRWE were well targeted and had high reliability (PSI = 0.86). These changes provided a unidimensional, interval-level scaled measure.ConclusionLike a previous analysis of the Patient-Rated Wrist and Hand Evaluation, this study found the PRWE could be fit to the Rasch model with rescoring of multiple items. However, the modifications required to achieve fit were not the same across studies, our fit statistics also suggested one of the pain items should be deleted. This study adds to the pool of evidence supporting the PRWE, but cannot confidently provide a Rasch-based scoring algorithm.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40945-018-0046-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) distal radius fracture (DRF) clinical practice guidelines (CPG) are readily available to clinicians, patients, and policymakers. International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) provides a framework for describing the impact of health conditions. The International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision (ICD-10) is a classification system to classify health conditions as specific disease or disorders. The aim of this study is to analyze and describe the scope and focus of the AAOS DRF CPG using the ICF and ICD-10 as a basis for content analysis, and to compare the content of the CPG with the ICF hand core sets as the reference standard. Methods: Established linking rules were used by 2 independent raters to analyze the 29 recommendations of the AAOS DRF CPG. ICD-10 codes were assigned in the same process. Summary linkage statistics were used to describe the results for ICF and the hand core sets. Results: Among the 29 recommendations of the AAOS DRF CPG, 5 meaningful concepts were linked to the ICF codes. Of these, 5 codes appeared on the comprehensive ICF core set and only 3 codes appeared in the brief ICF core set, and 7 conditions were covered in ICD-10 codes. Conclusions: The AAOS DRF CPG focuses on surgical interventions and has minimal linkage to the constructs of the ICD-10 and ICF. It does not address activity or participation (disability), and is not well linked to key concepts relevant to hand conditions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.