ArticlePloS one2020
Manual ability in hand surgery patients: Validation of the ABILHAND scale in four diagnostic groups.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transcultural Adaptation of the Spanish Version of the ABILHAND Scale for Hand Surgery in a Colombian Population of Patients with Hand Pathologies.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
- Biomechanical and clinical outcomes after distal biceps tendon reattachment using an endo button technique and an interference screw.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2024Article
- Quantitative assessments of finger individuation with an instrumented glove.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Recognizing Manual Activities Using Wearable Inertial Measurement Units: Clinical Application for Outcome Measurement.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients treated in hand surgery (HS) belong to different demographic groups and have varying impairments related to different pathologies. HS outcomes are measured to assess treatment results, complication risks and intervention reliability. A one-dimensional and linear measure would allow for unbiased comparisons of manual ability between patients and different treatment effects.
objectiveTo adapt the ABILHAND questionnaire through Rasch analysis for specific use in HS patients and to examine its validity.
methodsA preliminary 90-item questionnaire was presented to 216 patients representing the diagnoses most frequently encountered in HS, including distal radius fracture (n = 74), basal thumb arthritis (n = 66), carpal tunnel syndrome (n = 53), and heavy wrist surgery (n = 23). Patients were assessed during the early recovery and in the late follow-up period (0-3 months, 3-6 months and >6 months), leading to a total of 305 assessments. They rated their perceived difficulty with queried activities as impossible, difficult, or easy. Responses were analyzed using the RUMM2030 software. Items were refined based on item-patient targeting, fit statistics, differential item functioning, local independence and item redundancy. Patients also completed the QuickDASH, 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) and a numerical pain scale.
resultsThe rating scale Rasch model was used to select 23 mostly bimanual items on a 3-level scale, which constitute a unidimensional, linear measure of manual ability with good reliability across all included diagnostic groups (Person-Separation Index = 0.90). The resulting scale was found to be invariant across demographic and clinical subgroups and over time. ABILHAND-HS patient measures correlated significantly (p<0.001) with the QuickDASH (r = -0.77), SF-12 Physical Component Summary (r = 0.56), SF-12 Mental Component Summary (r = 0.31), and pain scale (r = -0.49).
conclusionABILHAND-HS is a robust person-centered measure of manual ability in HS patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.