The disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) outcome questionnaire: longitudinal construct validity and measuring self-rated health change after surgery

Christina Gummesson, Isam Atroshi, Charlotte Ekdahl, Christina Gummesson, Isam Atroshi, Charlotte Ekdahl

Abstract

Background: The disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) questionnaire is a self-administered region-specific outcome instrument developed as a measure of self-rated upper-extremity disability and symptoms. The DASH consists mainly of a 30-item disability/symptom scale, scored 0 (no disability) to 100. The main purpose of this study was to assess the longitudinal construct validity of the DASH among patients undergoing surgery. The second purpose was to quantify self-rated treatment effectiveness after surgery.

Methods: The longitudinal construct validity of the DASH was evaluated in 109 patients having surgical treatment for a variety of upper-extremity conditions, by assessing preoperative-to-postoperative (6-21 months) change in DASH score and calculating the effect size and standardized response mean. The magnitude of score change was also analyzed in relation to patients' responses to an item regarding self-perceived change in the status of the arm after surgery. Performance of the DASH as a measure of treatment effectiveness was assessed after surgery for subacromial impingement and carpal tunnel syndrome by calculating the effect size and standardized response mean.

Results: Among the 109 patients, the mean (SD) DASH score preoperatively was 35 (22) and postoperatively 24 (23) and the mean score change was 15 (13). The effect size was 0.7 and the standardized response mean 1.2.The mean change (95% confidence interval) in DASH score for the patients reporting the status of the arm as "much better" or "much worse" after surgery was 19 (15-23) and for those reporting it as "somewhat better" or "somewhat worse" was 10 (7-14) (p = 0.01). In measuring effectiveness of arthroscopic acromioplasty the effect size was 0.9 and standardized response mean 0.5; for carpal tunnel surgery the effect size was 0.7 and standardized response mean 1.0.

Conclusion: The DASH can detect and differentiate small and large changes of disability over time after surgery in patients with upper-extremity musculoskeletal disorders. A 10-point difference in mean DASH score may be considered as a minimal important change. The DASH can show treatment effectiveness after surgery for subacromial impingement and carpal tunnel syndrome. The effect size and standardized response mean may yield substantially differing results.

References

    1. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C, The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG) Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected] Am J Ind Med. 1996;29:602–608. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:6<602::AID-AJIM4>;2-L.
    1. Davis AM, Beaton DE, Hudak P, Amadio P, Bombardier C, Cole D, Hawker G, Katz JN, Makela M, Marx RG, Punnett L, Wright JG. Measuring disability of the upper extremity: a rationale supporting the use of a regional outcome measure. J Hand Ther. 1999;12:269–274.
    1. Beaton DE, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Wright JG, Tarasuk V, Bombardier C. Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity. J Hand Ther. 2001;14:128–146.
    1. Offenbaecher M, Ewert T, Sangha O, Stucki G. Validation of a German version of the disabilities of arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire (DASH-G) J Rheumatol. 2002;29:401–402.
    1. Padua R, Padua L, Ceccarelli E, Romanini E, Zanoli G, Amadio PC, Campi A. Italian version of the disability of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) questionnaire. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation. J Hand Surg Br. 2003;28:179–186. doi: 10.1016/S0266-7681(02)00303-0.
    1. Rosales RS, Delgado EB, De La Lastra-Bosch ID. Evaluation of the Spanish version of the DASH and carpal tunnel syndrome health-related quality-of-life instruments: Cross-cultural adaptation process and reliability. J Hand Surg Am. 2002;27:334–343. doi: 10.1053/jhsu.2002.30059.
    1. Atroshi I, Gummesson C, Andersson B, Dahlgren E, Johansson A. The disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) outcome questionnaire: reliability and validity of the Swedish version evaluated in 176 patients. Acta Orthop Scand. 2000;71:613–618. doi: 10.1080/000164700317362262.
    1. Dubert T, Voche P, Dumontier C, Dinh A. [The DASH questionnaire. French translation of a trans-cultural adaptation] Chir Main. 2001;20:294–302. doi: 10.1016/S1297-3203(01)00049-X.
    1. Veehof MM, Sleegers EJ, van Veldhoven NH, Schuurman AH, van Meeteren NL. Psychometric qualities of the Dutch language version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH-DLV) J Hand Ther. 2002;15:347–354.
    1. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Katz JN, Wright JG, Wells G, Boers M, Strand V, Shea B. Looking for important change/differences in studies of responsiveness. OMERACT MCID Working Group. Outcome Measures in Rheumatology. Minimal Clinically Important Difference. J Rheumatol. 2001;28:400–405.
    1. Deyo RA, Diehr P, Patrick DL. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures: statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin Trials. 1991;12:142S–158S.
    1. Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman G. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:171–178.
    1. Ware JEJ, Kemp JP, Buchner DA, Singer AE, Nolop KB, Goss TF. The responsiveness of disease-specific and generic health measures to changes in the severity of asthma among adults. Qual Life Res. 1998;7:235–244. doi: 10.1023/A:1008878031176.
    1. Wright JG, Young NL. A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:239–246. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00373-3.
    1. Stratford PW, Binkley FM, Riddle DL. Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. Phys Ther. 1996;76:1109–1123.
    1. Liang MH. Longitudinal construct validity: establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Med Care. 2000;38:II84–II90. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200009002-00013.
    1. Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA. Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2002;14:109–114. doi: 10.1097/00002281-200203000-00006.
    1. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:459–468. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00206-1.
    1. Liang MH, Lew RA, Stucki G, Fortin PR, Daltroy L. Measuring clinically important changes with patient-oriented questionnaires. Med Care. 2002;40:II45–II51.
    1. Solway S, Beaton DE, McConnell S, Bombardier C. Toronto, Ontario: Institute for Work & Health. 2nd. 2002. The DASH Outcome Measure User's Manual; p. 5.
    1. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2nd. 1995. Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use; p. 64.
    1. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. New York: McGraw-Hill. 3rd. 1994. Psychometric theory; p. 265.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner