QuickDASH Scores Do Not Differ Between Dominant Versus Nondominant-Sided Upper Extremity Injuries: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Background: The purpose of this retrospective cohort analysis was to examine whether hand dominance influenced patient-reported functional recovery, as reflected by changes in QuickDASH scores, during the 6 months after elective upper extremity surgery. We also sought to understand whether the degree of QuickDASH improvement differed by surgical location along the upper extremity. Methods: Surgical conditions were classified as either distal (hand/wrist) or proximal (elbow/shoulder). QuickDASH scores were analyzed at 3 time points: preoperatively, 3 months, and 6 months. Between-group comparisons (dominant vs nondominant injury) at each timepoint were performed using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, with change in QuickDASH score as the outcome. Longitudinal changes within patients were assessed using a linear mixed-effects model with QuickDASH as the outcome. Results: We analyzed 1692 patients meeting criteria; 97.2% of these had distal injuries, and the remaining 2.7% had proximal injuries. Of distal injuries, 56.3% were dominant-sided injuries; 50% of proximal injuries were dominant-sided. From preoperatively to 3 and 6 months postoperatively, QuickDASH scores decreased for all patients, indicating improved upper extremity function. Between-group comparisons revealed no differences in QuickDASH scores at any timepoint for dominant or nondominant injuries (all P > .05, Wilcoxon). The linear mixed-effects model confirmed a statistically significant reduction in QuickDASH scores over time ( P < .001), but no significant interaction between timepoint and dominant-hand status or proximal/distal injury was observed. Conclusion: Our findings suggest hand dominance and qDASH outcomes are not associated, suggesting similar recovery trajectories for dominant and nondominant injuries across proximal and distal locations.