Only the DASH and PRWE have evidence of reliability , validity , and responsiveness in patients with traumatic injuries to the h and and wrist ; other measures either have incomplete evidence or evidence gathered in a nontraumatic population .
Conclusions : The DASH and PRWE both have evidence of reliability , validity , and responsiveness in a h and and wrist trauma population .
Other PROMs used to assess h and and wrist trauma patients do not .
Background : Patient-reported outcome measures ( PROMs ) are important tools for assessing outcomes following injuries to the h and and wrist .
Many commonly used PROMs have no evidence of reliability , validity , and responsiveness in a h and and wrist trauma population .
This systematic review examines the PROMs used in the assessment of h and and wrist trauma patients , and the evidence for reliability , validity , and responsiveness of each measure in this population .
WHICH QUESTIONNAIRE IS BEST? THE RELIABILITY, VALIDITY AND EASE OF USE OF THE PATIENT EVALUATION MEASURE, THE DISABILITIES OF THE ARM, SHOULDER AND HAND AND THE MICHIGAN HAND OUTCOME MEASURE
The  Patient Evaluation Measure ( PEM ) , The  Michigan H and Outcome Question naire ( MHQ )  and the Disabilities of the Arm , Shoulder and H and ( DASH ) score were assessed independent of their originators for reliability , construct and criterion validity and acceptability , using an ease of use question naire . These were administered in r and om order to 100 patients with different h and and wrist disorders and with different impairments of movement , pain , sensation and strength . The internal consistency of all three question naires was very high suggesting redundancy in the questions . All question naires were reproducible and valid for finger and wrist disorders , but less for nerve disorders . All had poor construct validity . The PEM was the easiest to underst and and complete , taking the least time . Correlation between the scales is high and conversion equations were calculated . All three are reliable and reproducible patient completed question naires , but the PEM is the easiest to use . The validity of all is suspected for nerve disorders
Only the DASH and PRWE have evidence of reliability , validity , and responsiveness in patients with traumatic injuries to the h and and wrist ; other measures either have incomplete evidence or evidence gathered in a nontraumatic population .
Conclusions : The DASH and PRWE both have evidence of reliability , validity , and responsiveness in a h and and wrist trauma population .
Other PROMs used to assess h and and wrist trauma patients do not .
Background : Patient-reported outcome measures ( PROMs ) are important tools for assessing outcomes following injuries to the h and and wrist .
Many commonly used PROMs have no evidence of reliability , validity , and responsiveness in a h and and wrist trauma population .
This systematic review examines the PROMs used in the assessment of h and and wrist trauma patients , and the evidence for reliability , validity , and responsiveness of each measure in this population .