ArticleHand therapy2025
A survey of practice on the use of condition-specific patient reported outcome measures with patients who have distal radius fractures.
Article in Hand therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Distal radius fractures (DRF) are common injuries seen by therapists. Patient Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMs) are a way to measure recovery, yet previous research suggests PROM utilisation is low amongst therapists. This study looks at current use of condition specific PROMs amongst UK therapists treating patients with DRF and explores possible barriers and facilitators to their use. Methods: An online anonymised cross-sectional survey hosted on Qualtrics software was distributed to UK physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and therapy technicians via special interest groups and social media. Analysis was carried out on Excel and Qualtrics Software. Results: There were 60 responses to the survey. For therapists who use PROMs the Quick-Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, and Patient Reported Wrist Evaluation were the most used, but many therapists reported never using a PROM. Barriers identified included not having enough time in a therapy session, already collecting generic PROMs, and current PROMs did not add to their clinical reasoning. Therapists reported current condition specific PROMs did not capture the psychosocial impact of a DRF or help to assess return to full function. Conclusion: NHS managers should explore opportunities to collect generic PROMs in a way that has the least impact on clinician time. The development of a Core Outcome Set for hand and wrist trauma may help therapists to identify a toolkit of PROMs to measure different aspects of recovery from this injury but further research is needed to understand the utility of PROMs over individualised therapist assessment.
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.