ArticleBMJ open2026
Clinician stakeholder priorities for improving the management of non-traumatic wrist disorders in the UK: a nominal group technique study.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIncreasingly detailed investigation confirms that the best management of those with non-traumatic wrist disorders (NTWD) remains elusive, and considerable potential for improvements to care exists. This study aimed to use a modified virtual nominal group technique (vNGT) to facilitate clinician stakeholder discussions to create consensus statements and recommend priorities for future improvements in the management of NTWD in the UK.
methodsWe created knowledge-gap topic areas and developed statements to reflect these. Preliminary ranking, silent reflection and idea generation occurred prior to the workshop. Two 2-hour vNGT workshops were conducted (n=8 and n=7; specialist hand therapists (8), first contact practitioners (2), generalist secondary care physiotherapists (2), wrist and hand specialist orthopaedic surgeons (2), specialist rheumatology physiotherapist) during which five nominal questions were discussed to create consensus statements (November 2025). Ranking of statements from all activities occurred 1 week following completion of the final workshop.
resultsDirection was given for key components of assessment noting that specific diagnosis should be attempted, and de Quervain's tenosynovitis should be considered a distinct entity to grouped NTWD. Where specific diagnosis was deemed unattainable, a transition to a non-specific approach was recommended. Participants emphasised the importance of considering patient's lived experience and functional goals when informing management decisions. Prognosis and self-management strategies should be prioritised, avoiding either over-investigation for non-specific problems or generic management for distinct treatable conditions.
conclusionsUK-based clinician stakeholders, predominantly from secondary care, developed consensus-based priority statements regarding future improvements for the management of people with NTWD. Competing clinician perspectives were found regarding diagnostic specificity, resulting in apparently contradictory consensus priorities and highlighting underlying divisions in how NTWD are conceptualised and managed.
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.