Normative Values of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire for Patients with and without Hand Conditions

Abstract

Background The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) has been widely used for nearly twenty years to assess patients with a variety of hand and upper extremity conditions. However, normative data for this assessment has not previously been collected, limiting interpretation. Methods The MHQ was administered to 579 participants recruited from the general population. In addition to the six score domains of the MHQ, participants were asked to identify any problem affecting their hand(s), including trauma, hand disease/condition, systemic illness, or nonspecific symptoms. In addition, we collected comorbidities and demographic data for each respondent. Results Total MHQ score for healthy individuals was indicative of generally good hand function (95.2, 95% CI 94.3–96.1). Individuals with unilateral trauma had total MHQ score for their affected hand (90.3, 95% CI 87.9–92.6) that was lower than the score for their healthy hand (mean difference 5.7, 95% CI 3.2–8.3). For individuals with and without hand trauma, total MHQ score decreased with increasing number of comorbidities. Many of the differences in MHQ score between the problem hand and unaffected hand were smaller than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 3.0 to 23.0 for known pathologies of the hand and upper extremity. Conclusion These normative data provide appropriate baseline information for individuals with and without underlying hand conditions. Most notably, our findings suggest that individuals with a unilateral problem establish new sub-normative values for both their affected and unaffected hand. This data will encourage an appropriate understanding of the results of future studies containing the MHQ.

Performance of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire in hand osteoarthritis

“…Of the six MHQ subscales, scores on the scales of satisfaction, overall hand function and pain were the worst, while scales of work performance, ADL, and aesthetics were less affected. MHQ scores were evidently worse compared to a healthy population 24 . At baseline, the interquartile range (IQR) of the scores on the MHQ function subscales represented only 17.5% (overall hand function) and 21.4% (ADL) of the maximum possible score, while the IQR of the FIHOA and AUSCAN-function represented 9 (30%) and 12 points (33%) of the maximum possible score, respectively.…”

Early Cup Loosening After Metal-on-Metal Total Joint Replacement of the Trapeziometacarpal Joint: A Retrieval Study

“…These types of questions may be more useful in assessing thumb function rather than functions requiring power grip or involving heavier hand use (that the QDASH focuses on). The Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire (Nolte et al, 2017) or the Patient Rated Wrist and Hand Evaluation (Reigstad et al, 2013) could have been other alternatives, but they are lengthy and both include few finer motor tasks. The Sollerman hand function test, published in 1995 (Sollerman and Ejeskar, 1995) mainly for the assessment of tetraplegic patients, could have been an alternative way of scoring these patients.…”

The case for skin camouflage in the management of upper limb scarring – A case series

“…Normative data for a United States population and MCID for the pain (9.3), function (5.6) and activities of daily living (1.9) domains have also been determined for patients experiencing trauma. 20…”