Faculty Opinions recommendation of Recovery, responsiveness and interpretability of patient-reported outcome measures after surgery for Dupuytren's disease.

Author(s):  
Jagdeep Nanchahal
2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 22-31
Author(s):  
Jessca A Paynter ◽  
Vicky Tobin ◽  
James CS Leong ◽  
Warren Matthew Rozen ◽  
David J Hunter-Smith

Background: The delivery protocol of collagenase Clostridium histolyticum (collagenase) injection for Dupuytren’s disease is variable, due to limited evidence for any one approach and widespread ‘off-label’ delivery occurring in Australia. As such, this preliminary study aimed to assess whether different collagenase delivery protocols for treating Dupuytren’s disease have an impact on effectiveness and safety. It was hypothesised that different collagenase delivery would affect outcomes. Methods: This preliminary, prospective study included a consecutive cohort of adult patients with Dupuytren’s disease being treated with collagenase within two Australian public hospitals to determine whether different collagenase delivery protocols impact on effectiveness and safety. The therapeutic effect was measured objectively using the total passive extension deficit (TPED), clinical success and clinical improvement. Three patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were used: Unité Rhumatologique des Affections de la Main (URAM), the Southampton Dupuytren’s Scoring Scheme and the Canadian Occupational Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS). Results: The delivery of collagenase was variable at both clinics. The number of patients treated with collagenase at Institute I and Institute II was 49 and 18, respectively. Clinical success was achieved in 42 per cent of the Institute I and 35 per cent of the Institute II cohort. A statistically significant reduction in all three PROMs was observed for both cohorts. No significant differences between effectiveness or safety was found when comparing the two cohorts. Conclusion: The delivery of collagenase was variable at Institutes I and II, but these differences did not appear to impact the effectiveness or safety of collagenase delivery.


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Geoghegan ◽  
J Man ◽  
A Jain ◽  
JN Rodrigues

Abstract Introduction Dupuytren's diathesis describes an aggressive disease course with tendency for recurrence or extension following intervention. Conventional factors associated with Dupuytren's diathesis are ethnicity, family history, bilateral and ectopic disease. Disease recurrence is not the only cause of poor outcome following intervention. This systematic review aimed to identify all factors that have been investigated for a potential association with the development, progression, recurrence and outcome of treatment in Dupuytren's diathesis. Method A systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL using a PRISMA-compliant methodology up to February 2019 was conducted. Abstract screening and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Included prognostic cohort studies were quality assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Study tool. Result The search revealed 2,661 records from which 11 full text articles reported both conventional diathesis factors and outcomes (in addition to recurrence) following intervention for Dupuytren's in 938 patients. Collectively 67% underwent fasciectomy and seven outcomes were reported: three patient reported outcome measures (DASH, quick-DASH and EQ-5D), three functional measures (grip strength, joint angle correction and range of motion) and treatment complications. Two studies used multiple univariate statistical techniques and found no significant association between diathesis factors and disease outcome. Conclusion This systematic review challenges conventional notions of Diathesis factors and provides a comprehensive appraisal of factors associated with poor outcome following intervention for Dupuytren's disease. Take-home message Conventional factors associated with recurrence in Dupuytren's disease are not associated with poor outcome following intervention.


Spine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 434-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert K. Merrill ◽  
Lukas P. Zebala ◽  
Colleen Peters ◽  
Sheeraz A. Qureshi ◽  
Steven J. McAnany

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472097412
Author(s):  
Ali Aneizi ◽  
Dominique Gelmann ◽  
Dominic J. Ventimiglia ◽  
Patrick M. J. Sajak ◽  
Vidushan Nadarajah ◽  
...  

Background: The objectives of this study were to determine the baseline patient characteristics associated with preoperative opioid use and to establish whether preoperative opioid use is associated with baseline patient-reported outcome measures in patients undergoing common hand surgeries. Methods: Patients undergoing common hand surgeries from 2015 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospective orthopedic registry at a single academic institution. Medical records were reviewed to determine whether patients were opioid users versus nonusers. On enrollment in the registry, patients completed 6 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) domains (Physical Function, Pain Interference, Fatigue, Social Satisfaction, Anxiety, and Depression), the Brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire (BMHQ), a surgical expectations questionnaire, and Numeric Pain Scale (NPS). Statistical analysis included multivariable regression to determine whether preoperative opioid use was associated with patient characteristics and preoperative scores on patient-reported outcome measures. Results: After controlling for covariates, an analysis of 353 patients (opioid users, n = 122; nonusers, n = 231) showed that preoperative opioid use was associated with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class (odds ratio [OR], 2.88), current smoking (OR, 1.91), and lower body mass index (OR, 0.95). Preoperative opioid use was also associated with significantly worse baseline PROMIS scores across 6 domains, lower BMHQ scores, and NPS hand scores. Conclusions: Preoperative opioid use is common in hand surgery patients with a rate of 35%. Preoperative opioid use is associated with multiple baseline patient characteristics and is predictive of worse baseline scores on patient-reported outcome measures. Future studies should determine whether such associations persist in the postoperative setting between opioid users and nonusers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document