Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are often used to evaluate the outcome of treatment in patients with distal radial fractures. Which PROM to select is often based on assessment of measurement properties, such as validity and reliability. Measurement properties are assessed in clinimetric studies, and results are often reviewed without considering the methodological quality of these studies. Our aim was to systematically review the methodological quality of clinimetric studies that evaluated measurement properties of PROMs used in patients with distal radial fractures, and to make recommendations for the selection of PROMs based on the level of evidence of each individual measurement property. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMbase, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases to identify relevant clinimetric studies. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of the studies on measurement properties, using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Level of evidence (strong / moderate / limited / lacking) for each measurement property per PROM was determined by combining the methodological quality and the results of the different clinimetric studies.Objectives
Methods
Current studies on the additional benefit of using computed tomography
(CT) in order to evaluate the surgeons’ agreement on treatment plans
for fracture are inconsistent. This inconsistency can be explained
by a methodological phenomenon called ‘spectrum bias’, defined as
the bias inherent when investigators choose a population lacking
therapeutic uncertainty for evaluation. The aim of the study is
to determine the influence of spectrum bias on the intra-observer
agreement of treatment plans for fractures of the distal radius. Four surgeons evaluated 51 patients with displaced fractures
of the distal radius at four time points: T1 and T2: conventional
radiographs; T3 and T4: radiographs and additional CT scan (radiograph
and CT). Choice of treatment plan (operative or non-operative) and
therapeutic certainty (five-point scale: very uncertain to very
certain) were rated. To determine the influence of spectrum bias,
the intra-observer agreement was analysed, using Kappa statistics,
for each degree of therapeutic certainty. Objectives
Methods
