Gartland and Werley Score: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
== Objective and intended Population == | == Objective and intended Population == | ||
The Gartland & Werley Score is a point-based outcome measure used to evaluate hand and wrist function <ref>Changulani M, Okonkwo U, Keswani T, Kalairajah Y. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17534619/ Outcome evaluation measures for wrist and hand–which one to choose?.] International orthopaedics. 2008 Feb 1;32(1):1-6.</ref>. The scale, developed in 1951, was initially created for the evaluation of healed [[Colles Fracture|Colles fractures]]. The original scale is based on a "demerit" scoring system involving subjective and objective aspects related to wrist and hand function, residual deformities, range of motion and nerve complications. Two modified versions of the scale have been implemented. The first, included measures of pronation and strength <ref>Sarmiento A, Pratt GW, Berry NC, Sinclair WF. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1123382/ Colles' fractures. Functional bracing in supination]. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume. 1975 Apr;57(3):311-7.</ref>; the second author included evaluation of stiffness and reflexes<ref>LUCAS GL, SACHTJEN KM. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7226612/ An analysis of hand function in patients with Colles' fracture treated by Rush rod fixation. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®]. 1981 Mar 1;155:172-9.</ref>. | The Gartland & Werley Score is a point-based outcome measure used to evaluate hand and wrist function <ref name=":0">Changulani M, Okonkwo U, Keswani T, Kalairajah Y. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17534619/ Outcome evaluation measures for wrist and hand–which one to choose?.] International orthopaedics. 2008 Feb 1;32(1):1-6.</ref>. The scale, developed in 1951, was initially created for the evaluation of healed [[Colles Fracture|Colles fractures]]. The original scale is based on a "demerit" scoring system involving subjective and objective aspects related to wrist and hand function, residual deformities, range of motion and nerve complications. Two modified versions of the scale have been implemented. The first, included measures of pronation and strength <ref>Sarmiento A, Pratt GW, Berry NC, Sinclair WF. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1123382/ Colles' fractures. Functional bracing in supination]. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume. 1975 Apr;57(3):311-7.</ref>; the second author included evaluation of stiffness and reflexes<ref>LUCAS GL, SACHTJEN KM. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7226612/ An analysis of hand function in patients with Colles' fracture treated by Rush rod fixation. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®]. 1981 Mar 1;155:172-9.</ref>. | ||
== Method of Use == | == Method of Use == | ||
The score is based on a list of items categorised into four domains, namely residual deformity, subjective evaluation, objective evaluation and complications. Each assessed item is evaluated based on a demerit point system. The total score of the four domains is then summed up to construct the final score of the whole test. A final total score of 21 or above refers to "poor" hand function following an "healed" Colles fracture. | The score is based on a list of items categorised into four domains, namely residual deformity, subjective evaluation, objective evaluation and complications. Each assessed item is evaluated based on a demerit point system. The total score of the four domains is then summed up to construct the final score of the whole test. A final total score of 21 or above refers to "poor" hand function following an "healed" Colles fracture. | ||
The list of items with relative scores and cut-offs is presented below: | The list of items with relative scores and cut-offs is presented below: | ||
| Line 132: | Line 132: | ||
21 or above: Poor | 21 or above: Poor | ||
== | == Evidence == | ||
This outcome measure is reported to be broadly used by surgeons and in clinical reports <ref name=":0" /><ref>Dacombe PJ, Amirfeyz R, Davis T. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4920509/#:~:text=No%20evidence%20of%20its%20reliability,and%20responsiveness%20in%20this%20population. Patient-reported outcome measures for hand and wrist trauma: is there sufficient evidence of reliability, validity, and responsiveness?]. Hand. 2016 Mar;11(1):11-21.</ref>. However, despite its broad application in the clinical setting, there is, to the date, no evidence concerning reliability, validity or responsiveness of the test. <span style="font-size: 20px; font-weight: normal;" class="Apple-style-span"></span> | |||
== | |||
== Links == | == Links == | ||
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1007.7785&rep=rep1&type=pdf | |||
== References == | == References == | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
Revision as of 13:55, 21 October 2020
This article or area is currently under construction and may only be partially complete. Please come back soon to see the finished work! (11/10/2020)
Original Editor - User Name
Top Contributors - Gabriele Dara, Shaimaa Eldib and Kim Jackson
Objective and intended Population[edit | edit source]
The Gartland & Werley Score is a point-based outcome measure used to evaluate hand and wrist function [1]. The scale, developed in 1951, was initially created for the evaluation of healed Colles fractures. The original scale is based on a "demerit" scoring system involving subjective and objective aspects related to wrist and hand function, residual deformities, range of motion and nerve complications. Two modified versions of the scale have been implemented. The first, included measures of pronation and strength [2]; the second author included evaluation of stiffness and reflexes[3].
Method of Use[edit | edit source]
The score is based on a list of items categorised into four domains, namely residual deformity, subjective evaluation, objective evaluation and complications. Each assessed item is evaluated based on a demerit point system. The total score of the four domains is then summed up to construct the final score of the whole test. A final total score of 21 or above refers to "poor" hand function following an "healed" Colles fracture.
The list of items with relative scores and cut-offs is presented below:
| Section | Results | Points |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Residual deformities | |
| 1.1 | Prominent ulnar styloid | 1 |
| 1.2 | Residual dorsal tilt | 2 |
| 1.3 | Radial deviation of hand | 2 to 3 |
| 2 | Subjective evaluation | |
| 2.1 | No pain, disability or limitation in motion (Excellent) | 0 |
| 2.2 | Occasional pain, slight limitation in motion, no disability (Good) | 2 |
| 2.3 | Occasional pain, some limitation of motion, feeling of weakness in the wrist, no particular disability if careful, activities slightly restricted (Fair). | 4 |
| 2.4 | Pain, limitation of motion, disability, activities more or less markedly restricted (Poor) | 6 |
| 3 | Objective evaluation | |
| 3.1 | Loss of dorsiflexion | 5 |
| 3.2 | Loss of ulnar deviation | 3 |
| 3.3 | Loss of supination | 2 |
| 3.4 | Loss of palmar flexion | 1 |
| 3.5 | Loss of radial deviation | 1 |
| 3.6 | Loss of circumduction | 1 |
| 3.7 | Pain in distal radio-ulnar joint | 1 |
| 4 | Complications (Arthritic change) | |
| 4.1 | Minimal | 1 |
| 4.2 | Minimal with pain | 3 |
| 4.3 | Moderate | 2 |
| 4.4 | Moderate with pain | 4 |
| 4.5 | Severe | 3 |
| 4.6 | Severe with pain | 5 |
| 4.7 | Nerve complications (Median) | 1 to 3 |
| 4.8 | Poor finger function due to cast | 1 to 2 |
Cut-off scores for end-results point ranges are presented as following:
0-2: Excellent
3-8: Good
9-20: Fair
21 or above: Poor
Evidence[edit | edit source]
This outcome measure is reported to be broadly used by surgeons and in clinical reports [1][4]. However, despite its broad application in the clinical setting, there is, to the date, no evidence concerning reliability, validity or responsiveness of the test.
Links[edit | edit source]
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1007.7785&rep=rep1&type=pdf
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Changulani M, Okonkwo U, Keswani T, Kalairajah Y. Outcome evaluation measures for wrist and hand–which one to choose?. International orthopaedics. 2008 Feb 1;32(1):1-6.
- ↑ Sarmiento A, Pratt GW, Berry NC, Sinclair WF. Colles' fractures. Functional bracing in supination. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume. 1975 Apr;57(3):311-7.
- ↑ LUCAS GL, SACHTJEN KM. An analysis of hand function in patients with Colles' fracture treated by Rush rod fixation. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®. 1981 Mar 1;155:172-9.
- ↑ Dacombe PJ, Amirfeyz R, Davis T. Patient-reported outcome measures for hand and wrist trauma: is there sufficient evidence of reliability, validity, and responsiveness?. Hand. 2016 Mar;11(1):11-21.
