Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: Defining the optimal, evidence-based management of flexor tendon injury remains challenging. Lack of consensus on which measures to use to assess the outcome of interventions is a key issue, especially with regard to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). This systematic review defines the landscape of outcome measurement in studies on interventions for flexor tendon injuries to guide future research. METHODS: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review was conducted using bespoke search strategies applied to MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, CINAHL and AMED. A protocol was developed and registered prospectively (CRD42020186780). We identified all studies describing adult patients undergoing interventions for acute hand flexor tendon injuries. RESULTS: Of the 4844 studies, 114 studies met the final inclusion criteria for evaluating the outcomes of 8127 participants with 9071 injured digits. Studies included 24 randomised controlled trials, 19 cohort studies and 61 case series. Nine different PROMs were used in 24 studies (22%): three site-specific PROMs, one generic quality-of-life measure and four visual analogue scales. Clinician-reported outcome measures were used in 103 studies (96%), such as the range of motion reported in 102 studies (94%). Adverse outcomes were reported in 96 studies (89%), with the most frequently reported adverse outcomes being tendon rupture and infection. Re-operation was reported in 21 studies (19%). The most frequently reported health economic outcome measure was the length of work absence, reported in ten studies (9%). CONCLUSIONS: There is variability in the use of outcome measures used to study interventions for flexor tendon injuries. An independent systematic review of the psychometric properties of the identified outcome measures and a specific multi-stakeholder consensus process may support optimal choice and standardisation for future studies.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.bjps.2021.08.033

Type

Journal

J plast reconstr aesthet surg

Publication Date

04/2022

Volume

75

Pages

1455 - 1466

Keywords

Adult, Flexor tendon, Outcome measurement, Primary, Systematic review, Adult, Humans, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Range of Motion, Articular, Tendon Injuries, Tendons