Bone and Joint Institute
Validation of the QuickDASH and DASH in Patients With Distal Radius Fractures Through Agreement Analysis
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
6-1-2017
Journal
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume
98
Issue
6
First Page
1217
Last Page
1222.e1
URL with Digital Object Identifier
10.1016/j.apmr.2016.11.023
Abstract
© 2016 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine Objective To examine the agreement of scores between the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and QuickDASH questionnaires in patients with distal radius fractures (DRFs) and their score's concurrent validity with Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) scores. Design Validity study. Setting Hand and upper limb clinic. Participants Patients with DRFs (N=177) aged >18 years were included in this study. Interventions Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures Measurements of the DASH, QuickDASH, and PRWE were taken at baseline and 1-year follow-up. QuickDASH scores were extracted from the DASH scores. Agreement analysis of the DASH and QuickDASH were evaluated using Bland-Altman technique. Item difficulty analysis was performed to examine the distribution of QuickDASH items among DASH items. Responsiveness of the DASH, QuickDASH, and PRWE were also evaluated by calculating standardized response means. Results QuickDASH scores were higher than DASH scores, particularly at baseline. A mean difference of 3.8 and 1.2 points were observed at baseline and 1-year follow-up, respectively. The limits of agreement were wide at baseline, with a range of 24.8 points at baseline, but decreased to 12.5 points at 1-year follow-up. Item difficulty analysis revealed that QuickDASH items were not evenly distributed at baseline. Finally, the responsiveness of the DASH, QuickDASH, and PRWE were similar from baseline to 1-year follow-up (standardized response mean of 2.13, 2.17, and 2.19, respectively). Conclusions When changing from the DASH to the QuickDASH in the context of DRF, a systematic bias of higher scores on the QuickDASH should be considered by the user. However, the QuickDASH still demonstrated good concurrent validity and responsiveness.
