The DASH , the  Michigan H and Outcomes Question naire ( MHQ ) , the  Patient Evaluation Measure ( PEM ) , and the  Patient-Reported Wrist Evaluation ( PRWE ) had evidence supporting their reliability , validity , and responsiveness .
A post-hoc review of excluded studies revealed the AUSCAN Osteoarthritis H and Index as another suitable instrument that had favourable reliability , validity , and responsiveness .
The DASH , MHQ , and AUSCAN Osteoarthritis H and Index instruments were supported by the most favourable empirical evidence for validity , reliability , and responsiveness .
The PEM and PRWE also had favourable empirical evidence reported for these elements .
This paper aim ed to identify condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures used in clinical trials among people with wrist osteoarthritis and summarise empirical peer- review ed evidence supporting their reliability , validity , and responsiveness to change .
Comparison between proximal row carpectomy and four‐corner fusion for treating osteoarthrosis following carpal trauma: a prospective randomized study
OBJECTIVE : To compare the functional results of carpectomy and four‐corner fusion surgical procedures for treating osteoarthrosis following carpal trauma . METHODS : In this prospect i ve r and omized study , 20 patients underwent proximal row carpectomy or four‐corner fusion to treat wrist arthritis and their functional results were compared . The midcarpal joint was free of lesions in all patients . RESULTS : Both proximal row carpectomy and four‐corner fusion  reduced the pain . All patients had a decreased range of motion after surgery . The differences between groups were not statistically significant . CONCLUSIONS : Functional results of the two procedures were similar as both reduced pain in patients with scapholunate advanced collapse/scaphoid non‐union advanced collapse ( SLAC/SNAC ) wrist without degenerative changes in the midcarpal joint
The DASH , the  Michigan H and Outcomes Question naire ( MHQ ) , the  Patient Evaluation Measure ( PEM ) , and the  Patient-Reported Wrist Evaluation ( PRWE ) had evidence supporting their reliability , validity , and responsiveness .
A post-hoc review of excluded studies revealed the AUSCAN Osteoarthritis H and Index as another suitable instrument that had favourable reliability , validity , and responsiveness .
The DASH , MHQ , and AUSCAN Osteoarthritis H and Index instruments were supported by the most favourable empirical evidence for validity , reliability , and responsiveness .
The PEM and PRWE also had favourable empirical evidence reported for these elements .
This paper aim ed to identify condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures used in clinical trials among people with wrist osteoarthritis and summarise empirical peer- review ed evidence supporting their reliability , validity , and responsiveness to change .