Objectives. The patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire are patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used for clinical and research purposes. Methodological high-quality clinimetric studies that determine the measurement properties of these PROMs when used in patients with a distal radial fracture are lacking. This study aimed to validate the PRWE and DASH in Dutch patients with a displaced distal radial fracture (DRF). Methods. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used for test-retest reliability, between PROMs completed twice with a two-week interval at six to eight months after DRF. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach’s α for the dimensions found in the factor analysis. The measurement error was expressed by the smallest detectable change (SDC). A semi-structured interview was conducted between eight and 12 weeks after DRF to assess the content validity. Results. A total of 119 patients (mean age 58 years (. sd. 15)), 74% female, completed PROMs at a mean time of six months (. sd. 1) post-fracture. One overall meaningful dimension was found for the PRWE and the DASH. Internal consistency was excellent for both PROMs (Cronbach’s α 0.96 (PRWE) and 0.97 (DASH)). Test-retest reliability was good for the PRWE (ICC 0.87) and excellent for the DASH (ICC 0.91). The SDC was 20 for the PRWE and 14 for the DASH. No floor or ceiling effects were found. The content validity was good for both questionnaires. Conclusion. The PRWE and DASH are valid and reliable PROMs in assessing function and disability in Dutch patients with a displaced DRF. However, due to the high SDC, the PRWE and DASH are less useful for individual patients with a distal radial fracture in clinical practice. Cite this article: Y. V. Kleinlugtenbelt, R. G. Krol, M. Bhandari, J. C. Goslings, R. W. Poolman, V. A. B. Scholtes. Are the patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) and the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) questionnaire used in distal radial fractures truly valid and reliable? Bone Joint Res 2018;7:36–45. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.71.BJR-2017-0081.R1

Distal radial fractures are amongst the most common trauma referrals, however controversy remains regarding their optimum management. We undertook a retrospective review of the management of distal radial fractures in our department. The prospectively maintained trauma database was used to identify patients admitted for operative management of a dorsally displaced distal radial fracture between June 2008 and June 2009. Only extra-articular or simple intra-articular fractures were included (AO classification A2/A3/C1/C2). Operation notes were reviewed to determine the method of fixation. Patients were contacted by post and asked to complete a functional outcome score - Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH). A further 12 patients with similar fractures who had been managed conservatively were also asked to complete a DASH score to provide a comparison between operative and non-operative management. 98 patients were identified - 67 female, 31 male. Mean age was 51 years, range 15-85 years. All patients were at least 1 year post-op. 26 patients had manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA). 48 patients had MUA and K-wire fixation, which was supplemented with synthetic bone substitute in 16 cases. 3 patients had MUA and bone graft and 21 patients had open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with a volar plate. 34 correctly completed DASH scores were returned. A lower score equates to a better functional outcome. Mean DASH scores were: MUA 14.8; MUA+K-wire 13.1; ORIF 13.6; conservative 47.1. This data would indicate that patients with a significantly displaced distal radial fracture have a better functional outcome with operative management to improve the fracture alignment. However, all of the methods of fixation used resulted in similar functional outcomes at one year