Prospective Randomized Cohort Study to Explore the Acceptability of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Patients of Hand Clinics

PURPOSE: The purpose of this randomized prospective cohort study was to assess the acceptability of administering patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the waiting room of hand clinics. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to receive the Patient-Rated Wrist and Hand Evaluation (PRWHE), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, or Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ). Acceptability was measured in terms of data quality, participation, and retention rates. Data quality was determined by the number of incomplete questionnaires, unanswered questions, and unscorable questionnaires. Most frequently unanswered questions were identified. The participant-reported time taken to complete the questionnaires was collected. RESULTS: A total of 491 participants enrolled in this study. A participation rate of 85% with a retention rate of 94% indicated that patients found the administration of PROMs in the waiting room of the clinic to be acceptable. The proportion of missing data for each questionnaire was 4.2% for PRWHE, 3.9% for DASH and 6.3% for MHQ. Whether a questionnaire could be used to generate a score was determined by the scoring rules of each instrument. The proportion of questionnaires that were not completed sufficiently for a score to be generated was 0% for PRWHE, 9% for DASH, and 4% for MHQ. No association was found between whether a questionnaire could generate a score and participants’ sex, age, or the nature of the condition. Over 80% of participants reported taking 10 minutes or less to complete the questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that hand clinic patients will complete PROMs while waiting for the clinical review. The PRWHE and MHQ groups demonstrated good usability, because less than 5% were unable to produce a score. The usability of the DASH group was lower, because 9% were unable to be scored. This indicates that PRWHE and MHQ are more suitable than DASH to application in a hand clinic setting. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic III.