of motion, pain/symptoms, strength, and functional status (Table 2). Patient reported outcomes were used in nearly three-fourths of the studies, with half of the articles using standardized questionnaires such as the DASH or QuickDASH. Conclusion: Abundant high-quality research exists for a portion of the hand therapy scope of practice; however, more evidence is needed for complex diagnoses as well as for behavioral and quality- of-care outcomes. Given the preponderance of occupational ther- apists within the hand therapy profession, increasing evidence for activity-based interventions may be exceptionally vital. Similarly, there may be a need to expand the use of functional performance and activity-based outcome measures. Most importantly, it is essential for therapists to participate in the conduct of research to support practice and grow the evidence-based for hand therapy. Keywords: Hand therapy, Evidence-based practice, Outcome measures. 6 Efffectiveness of Conservative Treatment for Cubital Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review E.S. HO 1 , J. ZUCCARO 1 , K. DAVIDGE 1 , G. BORSCHEL 1 , V. WRIGHT 2 1 Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada 2 Bloorview Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada Purpose: Activity modification and splinting are the two mainstays of conservative treatment of Cubital Tunnel Syndrome (CuTS). The pur- pose of this systematic review is to evaluate the effectiveness of splinting and/or activity modification in adults and children with CuTS. We hypothesize that splinting and/or activity modification will be more effective in reducing signs and symptoms of CuTS than other conser- vative treatment methods, but less effective than surgical treatment. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PEDro, and Cochrane databases were searched from their inception until May 18, 2016. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated outcomes of splinting and/or activity modification in adults and children with CuTS were included. Comparison with a control group that had no treatment, surgical intervention or an alternate conservative treatment was required. Two independent reviewers extracted data on study design, participants, interventions, outcomes, results, quality, and risk of bias. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment and Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions tools were used to evaluate each study. Results: Of 2068 articles screened, 210 had full text review, and five were included. The two RCTs and three double cohort studies evaluated had overall high risk of bias and poor methodological quality. Qualitative synthesis found low quality evidence that splinting and/or activity modi fication was effective in reducing symptoms and improving activity performance in mild or moderate CuTS. These interventions are not more effective than other conservative treatments. However, low quality evi- dence suggests that activity modi fication alone may be suf ficient to have positive treatment effect. Splinting and/or activity modification was not effective in improving signs in individuals of all grades of CuTS. Comparative effectiveness of conservative and surgical treatment of CuTS was inconclusive due to threats to internal validity of included studies. Conclusion: Individuals with mild or moderate CuTS can attain symptom relief with splinting and/or activity modification, but improvements in sensory and motor signs are unlikely. Splinting and/or activity modification is not more effective than other con- servative treatments. In this review, a limited number of individuals with signs of CuTS received benefit from splinting and/or activity modification. This encourages clinicians to reconsider, in the context of the individual’s goals and risk of disease progression, whether a trial of conservative treatment is worthwhile. Keywords: Cubital tunnel syndrome, Splinting, Rehabilitation, Systematic review. 7 Cross-Cultural Adaptation, Validity, Reliability and Clinical Applicability of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire, and its Brief Version, to Canadian French S.A. BUSUIOC 1 , M. KARIM 1 , D. BOURBONNAIS 1, 2 , J.I. EFANOV 3 , A. IZADPANAH 3 , M.A. DANINO 3 , P. HARRIS 3 , J. BOU-MERHI 3 , L. DEMERS 1, 4 1 School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada 2 Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation of Greater Montreal (CRIR), Montreal, QC, Canada 3 Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, QC, Canada 4 Research Center of the Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal (IUGM), Montreal, QC, Canada Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become an essential part of patient evaluation, both in clinical and Table 1 Frequency of studies (n¼191) including interventions from the ASHT Scope of practice organized into categories for data extraction. Categories Interventions Education (n¼111) Patient/family education, ADL/adaptive/assistive/ergonomic device training, orthotic/prosthetic training, joint protection, energy conservation, nutrition instruction, home exercise program, ergonomic and activity modification, compensatory techniques, wellness education Exercise (n¼138) Exercise without clear functional implication (e.g., range of motion, tendon glides, strengthening) Activity (n¼12) Functional activity, therapeutic activity, work hardening, work conditioning, handwriting Manual Techniques (n¼53) Manual therapy, joint mobilization, nerve mobilization, edema mobilization, myofascial release, therapeutic massage, scar management, hypertrophic/keloid management, pressure therapy, scar mobilization/massage techniques, skin management Modalities (n¼36) Contrast bath, cryotherapy, diathermy, fluidotherapy, hot packs, iontophoresis, laser/light therapy, NMES/electric stimulation, paraffin, phonophoresis, TENS, ultrasound, whirlpool Orthoses/Prosthetics (n¼102) Orthotic design/selection/fitting/fabrication, fabrication of temporary prosthetic for functional activities Table 2 Frequency of studies (n¼191) including an outcome measure within each primary outcome category. Outcome Category Types of Outcome Measures Body Structure/ Pathology (n¼23) Disease Activity, Healing, Imaging, Swelling Body Function/ Physiology (n¼133) EMG, Joint Mobility, Range of Motion, Strength, Sensation Pain/Symptoms (n¼84) Level of Pain, Other Symptoms related to Diagnosis Performance/Activity (n¼87) Activity Adaptation, Functional Status, Return to Work Behavioral/ Psychosocial (n¼18) Anxiety, Compliance/Adherence, Quality of Life Quality of Care (n¼37) Cost, Number of Visits, Adverse Events, Patient Experience Abstracts / Journal of Hand Therapy 31 (2018) 141e170 145