Validity and responsiveness of the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test
Erika Davis Sears, Kevin C Chung, Erika Davis Sears, Kevin C Chung
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the validity and responsiveness of the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test (JTT) in measuring hand function in patients undergoing hand surgery, compared with the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ).
Methods: A prospective cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 37), osteoarthritis (n= 10), carpal tunnel syndrome (n = 18), and distal radius fracture (n = 46) were evaluated preoperatively and at 9 to 12 months of follow-up. We administered the JTT and MHQ. We performed correlation and receiver operating characteristic analyses to evaluate the validity of the JTT as a measure of disability. Effect size and standardized response means were calculated to determine responsiveness.
Results: Correlation studies revealed poor correlation of the JTT with MHQ total scores and subsets that relate to hand function. Patients with high MHQ scores generally perform well on the JTT; however, patients with good JTT scores do not necessarily have high MHQ scores. Receiver operating characteristic curves for each condition showed that the change in JTT total score had poor ability to discriminate between high and low MHQ score subjects, with an area under the curve result of 0.52 to 0.66 for each condition. Effect size and standardized response means for all states showed greater responsiveness with the MHQ for each condition compared with the JTT.
Conclusions: We found poor correlation between the change in JTT and absolute JTT scores after surgery compared with change in MHQ and absolute MHQ scores. In addition, the JTT had poor discriminant validity based on the MHQ as a reference. This study showed that the time to complete activities does not correlate well with patient-reported outcomes. We conclude that the JTT should not be used as a measure of disability or clinical change after surgical intervention.
Type of study/level of evidence: Diagnostic III.
Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Figures
Source: PubMed