Quick wins in research Collaboration between clinical and academics

1. Quick wins in research Collaboration between clinical and academics Faculty of Health Sciences: MSK Cluster/ Rehabilitation and Health Technologies

2. Funded clinical research studies Participation in funded research projects as a participant, clinical advisor, trial steering committees, PPI representative Co-applicants on funded research projects – strategic and linked in with national leaders with established portfolios

4. Funded clinical research studies Portfolio adopted studies – clinical collaborators http://public.ukcrn.org.uk/search/

5. Joint collaborative work Joint chapters Joint papers

6. The longitudinal validity of the quick and full version of the Disability of the Arm Shoulder and Hand questionnaire in musculoskeletal hand outpatients Kathy Whalley and Jo Adams + Author Affiliations *Lymington New Forest Hospital, Lymington, Hants †School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK Correspondence: Jo Adams, Professional Lead for Occupational Therapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. Email: ja@soton.ac.uk Abstract Objective Longitudinal validity refers to the ability of an outcome measure to detect clinically meaningful change in status, also referred to as responsiveness. Most recently the Department of Health has been a proponent of increased use of patient-reported outcome measures in evaluating the effectiveness of interventions to improve health. The Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire is a comprehensive self-report measure that has been used well in rehabilitation. More recently a shortened version – the Quick DASH has been developed. Methods This study compared the longitudinal validity of the DASH and Quick DASH in a cohort of musculoskeletal outpatients with hand trauma and degenerative hand conditions attending an outpatient occupational therapy (OT) rehabilitation service.

8. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kes296

9. Potential quick wins: Routinely collected data Standardised patient outcome measures Clinical significance – VAS alongside outcomes Responsiveness over time with your patient group Comparison between short and long standardised forms Comparison between self report and “objective” data Literacy levels required to navigate through your service

10. “You don't have to be technically/research minded. If you collaborate you just do the bit you're good at and the academic researcher does the rest!” “It's amazing seeing your work in print, and even better when you see it's been referenced in other people's work!” “Collaborating is mutually beneficial”

11. “ “ Data collection in the work place is part of our job anyway and we do it all the time. Make it something interesting to people outside of your organisation and you've got yourself a potential piece worth publishing”

12. “It's amazing seeing your work in print, and even better when you see it's been referenced in other people's work!” Good for CPD, accreditation etc as well as respect in the field”.

13. “I think that as a "worker" who is not research-minded you think getting something published is way too hard, but actually handing over the work at the point of analysis and write up makes it incredibly easy”.

14. Healthcare professionals’ views on musculoskeletal patient education for people with lower levels of literacy Explore HP’s perspectives’ on how patients with MSK and lower literacy understand and manage their condition Explore HP’s views of their patient education practice when working with people who have MSK conditions and lower literacy w.a.lowe@soton.ac.uk or ja@soton.ac.uk