Measurement properties of the Dutch versions of QuickDASH and PRWHE in patients with complaints of hand, wrist, forearm and elbow

BACKGROUND: The shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) and Patient Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (PRWHE) are commonly used questionnaires to assess patient-reported hand function. Information about the measurement properties of the Dutch versions is scarce.

OBJECTIVE: To gain insight into the measurement properties of the Dutch language versions of the QuickDASH and the PRWHE in patients with (non)specific complaints of the hand, wrist, forearm and elbow.

METHODS: Internal consistency, construct validity, test-retest reliability, responsiveness, and floor and ceiling effects were assessed according to COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) recommendations.

RESULTS: Questionnaires were filled out by 132 patients. Internal consistency of QuickDASH (Cronbach's α= 0.92) and PRWHE (Cronbach's α= 0.97) was high. Predefined hypotheses for construct validity were not confirmed for 75% for both QuickDASH and PRWHE (accordance with 62% of predefined hypotheses for both questionnaires). Test-retest reliability of QuickDASH (ICC = 0.90) and PRWHE (ICC = 0.87) was good. Both QuickDASH (AUC = 0.84) and PRWHE (AUC = 0.80) showed good responsiveness. No floor or ceiling effects were present.

CONCLUSIONS: Measurement properties of the Dutch language versions of the QuickDASH and the PRWHE, applied to patients with (non)specific complaints of the hand, wrist, forearm and elbow, were very similar. Test-retest reliability and responsiveness were good for both QuickDASH and PRWHE. Construct validity could not be demonstrated sufficiently.