Cross-Cultural Adaptation, Validity, and Reliability of the Patient-Rated Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire for Thai Patients.
Jananya P Dhippayom, Piyawat Trevittaya, Andy S K Cheng
PMID 30581375WHAT IT FOUND
The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire is now available in Thai and works reliably for hand injury patients.
Scores stay consistent over time, and most domains are internally sound. The aesthetics section is less reliable, so interpret those specific scores with caution.
Key findings
01The Thai version of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire showed excellent stability when patients completed it twice, with a total score reliability coefficient of 0.953.
02While most sections of the questionnaire were internally consistent, the aesthetics domain scored below acceptable thresholds, suggesting its items do not measure the same thing.
03Patients who reported higher satisfaction had better overall hand function, fewer difficulties with daily activities, and less pain, indicating these factors drive how they feel about their hand outcomes.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study sample was small (30 patients), which limits the generalizability of the findings to all hand injury populations. The aesthetics domain showed poor internal consistency, meaning those specific questions may not be reliable for measuring patient concerns about appearance. The study did not record how long it took patients to complete the questionnaire, so it is unclear if it is feasible for use in busy clinical settings. Participants were recruited from only four hospitals in three provinces, which may not represent all regions or types of healthcare settings in Thailand.
Declared interests
The study was approved by the ethical committee at Chiang Mai University. Permission to translate the original MHQ was granted by the University of Michigan developers. No specific funding sources or author conflicts of interest were declared in the text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume the aesthetics subscale is as reliable as the rest of the questionnaire. Its low internal consistency suggests that scores in this area may not accurately reflect patient satisfaction with their hand's appearance, so interpret those results with extra caution.