Weinstock-Zlotnick G, Page C, Ghomrawi HM, Wolff AL (2015) Responsiveness of three patient report outcome (PRO) measures in patients with hand fractures: a preliminary cohort study. J Hand Ther 28(4):403–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jht.2015.05.004

Article  Google Scholar 

Shapiro LM, Eppler SL, Roe AK, Morris A, Kamal RN (2021) The patient perspective on patient-reported outcome measures following elective hand surgery: a convergent mixed-methods analysis. J Hand Surg Am 46(2):153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2020.09.008

Kamal RN, Lindsay SE, Eppler SL (2018) Patients should define value in health care: a conceptual framework. J Hand Surg Am 43(11):1030–1034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2018.03.036

Article  Google Scholar 

Badalamente M, Coffelt L, Elfar J, Gaston G, Hammert W, Huang J et al (2013) Measurement scales in clinical research of the upper extremity, part 2: outcome measures in studies of the hand/wrist and shoulder/elbow. J Hand Surg Am 38(2):407–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2012.11.029

Article  Google Scholar 

Hoang-Kim A, Pegreffi F, Moroni A, Ladd A (2011) Measuring wrist and hand function: common scales and checklists. Injury 42(3):253–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.050

Article  Google Scholar 

Smith MV, Calfee RP, Baumgarten KM, Brophy RH, Wright RW (2012) Upper extremity-specific measures of disability and outcomes in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(3):277–285. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.01744

Article  Google Scholar 

Rundgren J, Enocson A, Mellstrand Navarro C, Bergstrom G (2018) Responsiveness of EQ-5D in patients with a distal radius fracture. Hand 13(5):572–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558944717725378

Article  Google Scholar 

Horng YS, Lin MC, Feng CT, Huang CH, Wu HC, Wang JD (2010) Responsiveness of the Michigan hand outcomes questionnaire and the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire in patients with hand injury. J Hand Surg Am 35(3):430–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2009.11.016

McMillan CR, Binhammer PA (2009) Which outcome measure is the best? Evaluating responsiveness of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire, the Michigan hand questionnaire and the patient-specific functional scale following hand and wrist surgery. Hand 4(3):311–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11552-009-9167-x

MacDermid JC, Richards RS, Donner A, Bellamy N, Roth JH (2000) Responsiveness of the short form-36, disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire, patient-rated wrist evaluation, and physical impairment measurements in evaluating recovery after a distal radius fracture. J Hand Surg Am 25(2):330–340. https://doi.org/10.1053/jhsu.2000.jhsu25a0330

Article  Google Scholar 

Dogu B, Usen A, Kuran B, Yilmaz F, Sirzai H (2019) Comparison of responsiveness of Michigan hand outcomes questionnaire, disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire, and Duruoz hand index in patients with traumatic hand injury. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 32(1):111–117. https://doi.org/10.3233/BMR-181255

Fang C, Fang E, Yee DK, Kwan K, Leung G, Leung F (2021) A comparison of six outcome measures across the recovery period after distal radius fixation—which to use and when? J Orthop Surg 29(1):2309499020971866. https://doi.org/10.1177/2309499020971866

Kim JK, Park ES (2013) Comparative responsiveness and minimal clinically important differences for idiopathic ulnar impaction syndrome. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(5):1406–1411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-2843-8

Article  Google Scholar 

Dawson J, Doll H, Boller I, Fitzpatrick R, Little C, Rees J et al (2008) Comparative responsiveness and minimal change for the Oxford Elbow Score following surgery. Qual Life Res 17(10):1257–1267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9409-3

Article  Google Scholar 

Kotsis SV, Lau FH, Chung KC (2007) Responsiveness of the Michigan hand outcomes questionnaire and physical measurements in outcome studies of distal radius fracture treatment. J Hand Surg Am 32(1):84–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2006.10.003

Kotsis SV, Chung KC (2005) Responsiveness of the Michigan hand outcomes questionnaire and the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire in carpal tunnel surgery. J Hand Surg Am 30(1):81–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2004.10.006

Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C (1996) Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med 29(6):602–608

Beaton DE, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Wright JG, Tarasuk V, Bombardier C (2001) Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity. J Hand Ther 14(2):128–146

Article  Google Scholar 

Chung KC, Pillsbury MS, Walters MR, Hayward RA (1998) Reliability and validity testing of the Michigan hand outcomes questionnaire. J Hand Surg Am 23(4):575–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0363-5023(98)80042-7

MacDermid JC (1996) Development of a scale for patient rating of wrist pain and disability. J Hand Ther 9(2):178–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0894-1130(96)80076-7

Article  Google Scholar 

MacDermid JC, Tottenham V (2004) Responsiveness of the disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) and patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation (PRWHE) in evaluating change after hand therapy. J Hand Ther 17(1):18–23. https://doi.org/10.1197/j.jht.2003.10.003

Article  Google Scholar 

Eppler SL, Kakar S, Sheikholeslami N, Sun B, Pennell H, Kamal RN (2019) Defining quality in hand surgery from the patient’s perspective: a qualitative analysis. J Hand Surg Am. 44(4):311–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2018.06.007

Article  Google Scholar 

Bray N, Spencer LH, Edwards RT (2020) Preference-based measures of health-related quality of life in congenital mobility impairment: a systematic review of validity and responsiveness. Health Econ Rev 10(1):9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-020-00270-3

Article  Google Scholar 

Atthakomol P, Manosroi W, Mongkonkamthon A, Buranaworathitikul P, Wongcharoen W, Tongprasert S et al (2021) Crosscultural adaptation, construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Thai version of the Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (Thai PRWHE). Qual Life Res 30(6):1793–1802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02760-1

Article  Google Scholar 

Atthakomol P, Manosroi W, Sanguanrungsirikul S, Punoppamas S, Benjachaya S, Tongprasert S et al (2020) A Thai version of the Michigan hand questionnaire (Thai MHQ): an investigation of the psychometric properties. Health Qual Life Outcomes 18(1):313. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01548-0

Article  Google Scholar 

Tongprasert S, Rapipong J, Buntragulpoontawee M (2014) The cross-cultural adaptation of the DASH questionnaire in Thai (DASH-TH). J Hand Ther 27(1):49–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jht.2013.08.020

Article  Google Scholar 

Pattanaphesaj J (2014) Health-related quality of life measure (EQ-5D-5L): measurement property testing and its preference-based score in Thai population. Doctoral dissertion. Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom

von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP et al (2014) The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg 12(12):1495–1499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.07.013

Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D et al (2011) Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res 20(10):1727–1736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x

Article  Google Scholar 

Devlin NJ, Brooks R (2017) EQ-5D and the EuroQol group: past, present and future. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 15(2):127–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-017-0310-5

Article  Google Scholar 

Pattanaphesaj J, Thavorncharoensap M (2015) Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to EQ-5D-3L in the Thai diabetes patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes 13:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-014-0203-3

Article  Google Scholar 

Sakthong P, Sonsa-Ardjit N, Sukarnjanaset P, Munpan W (2015) Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in Thai patients with chronic diseases. Qual Life Res 24(12):3015–3022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1038-z

Article  Google Scholar 

Buntragulpoontawee M, Phutrit S, Tongprasert S, Wongpakaran T, Khunachiva J (2018) Construct validity, test-retest reliability and internal consistency of the Thai version of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire (DASH-TH) in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. BMC Res Notes 11(1):208. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-018-3318-5

Article  Google Scholar 

Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J et al (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60(1):34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012

Article  Google Scholar 

Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL (1996) Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. Phys Ther 76(10):1109–1123. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/76.10.1109

Article  Google Scholar 

McHorney CA, Tarlov AR (1995) Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res 4(4):293–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01593882

Article  Google Scholar 

Perkins HS, Freed AA, Cortez JD, Hazuda HP (2019) Patient-centered involvement in decision-making: ethnic group and sex as indicators of patients’ preferences and perceptions. Med Care 57(7):521–527. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001132

Article  Google Scholar 

Orsini CA, Setlow B (2017) Sex differences in animal models of decision making. J Neurosci Res 95(1–2):260–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/jnr.23810

Article  Google Scholar 

Vasiliadis AV, Charitoudis G, Giotis D, Paschos NK, Malahias MA, Drosos G (2020) Hand disorders demographics in rural areas: a 15-year analysis of demographic characteristics overtime in a stable population. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 54(6):604–608. https://doi.org/10.5152/j.aott.2020.19184

Article  Google Scholar 

Walker-Bone K, Palmer KT, Reading I, Coggon D, Cooper C (2004) Prevalence and impact of musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb in the general population. Arthritis Rheum 51(4):642–651. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.20535

Article  Google Scholar 

Dibenedetti DB, Nguyen D, Zografos L, Ziemiecki R, Zhou X (2011) Prevalence, incidence, and treatments of Dupuytren’s disease in the United States: results from a population-based study. Hand 6(2):149–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11552-010-9306-4

Article  Google Scholar 

Yeh CC, Huang KF, Ho CH, Chen KT, Liu C, Wang JJ et al (2015) Epidemiological profile of Dupuytren’s disease in Taiwan (Ethnic Chinese): a nationwide population-based study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 16:20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0476-7

Article  Google Scholar 

Lee KH, Kim JH, Lee CH, Kim SJ, Jo YH, Lee M et al (2018) The epidemiology of Dupuytren’s disease in Korea: a nationwide population-based study. J Korean Med Sci 33(31):e204. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e204

Sasaki N, Uesato R, Yamauchi T, Ishibashi Y, Nakaji S (2021) Epidemiology of Dupuytren’s disease in Japanese general population. J Hand Surg Asian Pac 26(2):229–234. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424835521500235