ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024
Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ-Sp) in Spain.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Impact of Task-oriented Exercises and Mirror Therapy on Hand Functions Post Flexor Tendon Repair
Validity and Reliability of Arabic Version of Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire in Assessment of Hand Function Post-burn
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) is a self-report tool widely recognized for measuring the health status of patients with hand and wrist problems from a multidimensional perspective. The aim of this study is to translate and culturally adapt the MHQ and validate its psychometric properties of validity, reliability, and responsiveness for different hand problems in Spain.
methodsThe MHQ was translated and culturally adapted following the recommendations of the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons. The validation process adhered to the current Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) group and was conducted on 262 hand patients. Reliability was assessed through internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha. The study evaluated the test-retest reliability of the measurements using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Additionally, the measurement error was calculated using the standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC). To assess the structural validity, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was employed, while construct validity was evaluated using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Finally, responsiveness was assessed using effect size (ES), standardized response mean (SRM), and minimum clinically important difference (MCID).
resultsThe reliability of the test was confirmed through internal consistency analysis, with a good Crombach's Alpha (0.82-0.85), and test-retest analysis, with good values of ICC (0.74-0.91). The measurement error was also assessed, with low values of SEM (1.70-4.67) and SDC (4.71-12.94)). The CFA confirmed the unidimensionality of each scale with goodness of fit indices, while the MHQ showed a high and negative correlation with DASH (r = - 0.75, P < 0.001) and DASH-work (r = - 0.63, P < 0.001) and was irrelevant with EQ-5D (r = - 0.01, P > 0.005) and grip strength (r = 0.05, P > 0.005). At week 5, all 222 patients across the three diagnosed hand subgroups showed moderate to high values above 0.92 for ES and SRM, with one MCID above 6.85.
conclusionsThe MHQ-Sp was culturally adapted, and the results of this version showed good reliability and validity as well as high responsiveness for a wide range of hand conditions after surgical or conservative treatment in Spain.
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.