PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - A. Willemien Visser
AU  - Pernille Bøyesen
AU  - Ida K. Haugen
AU  - Jan W. Schoones
AU  - Désirée M. van der Heijde
AU  - Frits R. Rosendaal
AU  - Margreet Kloppenburg
TI  - Instruments Measuring Pain, Physical Function, or Patient’s Global Assessment in Hand Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Literature Search
AID  - 10.3899/jrheum.141228
DP  - 2015 Nov 01
TA  - The Journal of Rheumatology
PG  - 2118--2134
VI  - 42
IP  - 11
4099  - http://www.jrheum.org/content/42/11/2118.short
4100  - http://www.jrheum.org/content/42/11/2118.full
SO  - J Rheumatol2015 Nov 01; 42
AB  - Objective. Description of use and metric properties of instruments measuring pain, physical function, or patient’s global assessment (PtGA) in hand osteoarthritis (OA).Methods. Medical literature databases up to January 2014 were systematically reviewed for studies reporting on instruments measuring pain, physical function, or PtGA in hand OA. The frequency of the use of these instruments were described, as well as their metric properties, including discrimination (reliability, sensitivity to change), feasibility, and validity.Results. In 66 included studies, various questionnaires and performance- or assessor-based instruments were applied for evaluation of pain, physical function, or PtGA. No major differences regarding metric properties were observed between the instruments, although the amount of supporting evidence varied. The most frequently evaluated questionnaires were the Australian/Canadian Hand OA Index (AUSCAN) pain subscale and visual analog scale (VAS) pain for pain assessment, and the AUSCAN function subscale and Functional Index for Hand OA (FIHOA) for physical function assessment. Excellent reliability was shown for the AUSCAN and FIHOA, and good sensitivity to change for all mentioned instruments; additionally, the FIHOA had good feasibility. Good construct validity was suggested for all mentioned questionnaires. The most commonly applied performance- or assessor-based instruments were the grip and pinch strength for the assessment of physical function, and the assessment of pain by palpation. For these measures, good sensitivity to change and construct validity were established.Conclusion. The AUSCAN, FIHOA, VAS pain, grip and pinch strength, and pain on palpation were most frequently used and provided most supporting evidence for good metric properties. More research has to be performed to compare the different instruments with each other.