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 .
Continuous low-level heat wrap therapy is effective for treating wrist pain.
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy of continuous low-level heat wrap therapy for the treatment of various sources of wrist pain including strain and sprain ( SS ) , tendinosis ( T ) , osteoarthritis ( OA ) , and carpal tunnel syndrome ( CTS ) . DESIGN Prospect i ve , r and omized , parallel , single-blind ( investigator ) , placebo-controlled , multicenter clinical trial . SETTING Two community-based research facilities . PARTICIPANTS Ninety-three patients ( age range , 18 - 65 y ) with wrist pain . INTERVENTION Subjects with moderate or greater wrist pain were r and omized and stratified to 1 of the following treatments : efficacy evaluation ( heat wrap , n=39 ; oral placebo , n=42 ) or blinding ( oral acetaminophen , n=6 ; unheated wrap , n=6 ) . Data were recorded over 3 days of treatment and 2 days of follow-up . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary comparison was between the heat wrap and the oral placebo group among SS/T/OA subjects for pain relief . Outcome measures included pain relief ( 0 - 5 scale ) , joint stiffness ( 101-point numeric rating scale ) , grip strength measured by dynamometry , and perceived pain and disability ( Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation [ PRWE ] ) ; subjects with CTS also completed the Symptom Severity Scale and Functional Status Scale . RESULTS Heat wrap therapy showed significant benefits in day 1 to 3 mean pain relief ( P=.045 ) and increased day 3 grip strength ( P=.02 ) versus oral placebo for the SS/T/OA group . However , joint stiffness and PRWE results were comparable between the 2 treatments . For the CTS group , heat wraps provided greater day 1 to 3/hour 0 to 8 mean pain relief ( P=.001 ) , day 1 to 3 mean joint stiffness reduction ( P=.004 ) , increased day 3 grip strength ( P=.003 ) , reduced PRWE scores ( P=.0015 ) , reduced symptom severity ( P=.001 ) , and improved functional status ( P=.04 ) . In addition , the heat wrap showed significant extended benefits through follow-up ( day 5 ) in the CTS group . CONCLUSIONS Continuous low-level heat wrap therapy was efficacious for the treatment of common conditions causing wrist pain and impairment
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 .