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 .
Reference bias: presentation of extreme health states prior to eq-vas improves health-related quality of life scores. a randomised cross-over trial
Background Clinical practice and clinical research has made a concerted effort to move beyond the use of clinical indicators alone and embrace patient focused care through the use of patient reported outcomes such as health-related quality of life . However , unless patients give consistent consideration to the health states that give meaning to measurement scales used to evaluate these constructs , longitudinal comparison of these measures may be invalid . This study aim ed to investigate whether patients give consideration to a st and ard health state rating scale ( EQ-VAS )  and whether consideration of good and poor health state descriptors immediately changes their self-report . Methods A r and omised crossover trial was implemented amongst hospitalised older adults ( n = 151 ) . Patients were asked to consider descriptions of extremely good ( Description-A ) and poor ( Description-B ) health states . The EQ-VAS  was administered as a self-report at baseline , after the first descriptors ( A or B ) , then again after the remaining descriptors ( B or A respectively ) . At baseline patients were also asked if they had considered either EQ-VAS anchors . Results Overall 106/151 ( 70 % ) participants changed their self-evaluation by ≥5 points on the 100 point VAS , with a mean ( SD ) change of + 4.5 ( 12 ) points ( p < 0.001 ) . A total of 74/151 ( 49 % ) participants did not consider the best health VAS anchor , of the 77 who did 59 ( 77 % ) thought the good health descriptors were more extreme ( better ) then they had previously considered . Similarly 85/151 ( 66 % ) participants did not consider the worst health anchor of the 66 who did 63 ( 95 % ) thought the poor health descriptors were more extreme ( worse ) then they had previously considered . Conclusions Health state self-reports may not be well considered . An immediate significant shift in response can be elicited by exposure to a mere description of an extreme health state despite no actual change in underlying health state occurring . Caution should be exercised in research and clinical setting s when interpreting subjective patient reported outcomes that are dependent on brief anchors for meaning . Trial Registration Australian and New Zeal and Clinical Trials Registry ( # ACTRN12607000606482 )
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 .