Flexor tendon laceration is a common injury. Outcome following surgical repair can be varied. Complications such as stiffness and re-rupture are frequently seen. There is currently minimal high-level clinical outcome evidence to guide management of acute flexor tendon injuries. A wide variety of techniques for repair and subsequent rehabilitation are described and there is large variation in management. Outcome reporting has historically concentrated on range of movement. Recently there has been an increase in the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hand surgery although the consensus of PROM choice is lacking and none are specific for flexor tendon repair.
At present there is no recommended standard set of outcomes to report following flexor tendon repair. A wide range of outcomes are reported which makes comparison of studies for systematic review or meta-analysis difficult.
This systematic review summarises outcome reporting practices after flexor tendon repair in publications over a 30-year period. The aim is to assess the outcomes reported in trials and observational studies of flexor tendon repair surgery and to inform the development of a core outcome set.
Miss Emma Bamford - research hand therapist
Dr Anna Selby - research unit manager
Mr Peter Russell - consultant hand surgeon - supervisor
Mr Ravi Mallina - orthopaedic hand surgeon
Mr Nick Johnson - consultant hand surgeon
Pulvertaft hand centre, Derby, UK
Disease Category: Orthopaedics & trauma
Disease Name: Flexor tendon injury
Age Range: 16 - 120
Sex: Either
Nature of Intervention: Surgery
- None
- Systematic review of outcomes measured in trials
- Systematic review
A systematic review will be carried out and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A clinical librarian will carry out a literature search of search of Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, and CINAHL from January 1980 onwards. All studies reporting outcome following flexor tendon repair will be included.2 independent reviewers will screen abstracts then full papers to identify studies for inclusion. 2 reviewers will then extract data including study data and outcome classified by domain.
The number of unique definitions, measures, assessment times, and result reporting
methods used to characterise a single outcome will be reported.