-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2018Rheumatoid arthritis is an inflammatory polyarthritis that frequently affects the hands and wrists. Hand exercises are prescribed to improve mobility and strength, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Rheumatoid arthritis is an inflammatory polyarthritis that frequently affects the hands and wrists. Hand exercises are prescribed to improve mobility and strength, and thereby hand function.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits and harms of hand exercise in adults with rheumatoid arthritis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), OTseeker, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) up to July 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered all randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared hand exercise with any non-exercise therapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures as outlined by the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven studies involving 841 people (aged 20 to 94 years) in the review. Most studies used validated diagnostic criteria and involved home programmes.Very low-quality evidence (due to risk of bias and imprecision) from one study indicated uncertainty about whether exercise improves hand function in the short term (< 3 months). On a 0 to 80 points hand function test (higher scores mean better function), the exercise group (n = 11) scored 76.1 points and control group (n = 13) scored 75 points.Moderate-quality evidence (due to risk of bias) from one study indicated that exercise compared to usual care probably slightly improves hand function (mean difference (MD) 4.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.58 to 7.42; n = 449) in the medium term (3 to 11 months) and in the long term (12 months or beyond) (MD 4.3, 95% CI 0.86 to 7.74; n = 438). The absolute change on a 0-to-100 hand function scale (higher scores mean better function) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) were 5% (95% CI 2% to 7%); 8 (95% CI 5 to 20) and 4% (95% CI 1% to 8%); 9 (95% CI 6 to 27), respectively. A 4% to 5% improvement indicates a minimal clinical benefit.Very low-quality evidence (due to risk of bias and imprecision) from two studies indicated uncertainty about whether exercise compared to no treatment improved pain (MD -27.98, 95% CI -48.93 to -7.03; n = 124) in the short term. The absolute change on a 0-to-100-millimetre scale (higher scores mean more pain) was -28% (95% CI -49% to -7%) and NNTB 2 (95% CI 2 to 11).Moderate-quality evidence (due to risk of bias) from one study indicated that there is probably little or no difference between exercise and usual care on pain in the medium (MD -2.8, 95% CI - 6.96 to 1.36; n = 445) and long term (MD -3.7, 95% CI -8.1 to 0.7; n = 437). On a 0-to-100 scale, the absolute changes were -3% (95% CI -7% to 2%) and -4% (95% CI -8% to 1%), respectively.Very low-quality evidence (due to risk of bias and imprecision) from three studies (n = 141) indicated uncertainty about whether exercise compared to no treatment improved grip strength in the short term. The standardised mean difference for the left hand was 0.44 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.78), re-expressed as 3.5 kg (95% CI 0.87 to 6.1); and for the right hand 0.46 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.8), re-expressed as 4 kg (95% CI 1.13 to 7).High-quality evidence from one study showed that exercise compared to usual care has little or no benefit on mean grip strength (in kg) of both hands in the medium term (MD 1.4, 95% CI -0.27 to 3.07; n = 400), relative change 11% (95% CI -2% to 13%); and in the long term (MD 1.2, 95% CI -0.62 to 3.02; n = 355), relative change 9% (95% CI -5% to 23%).Very low-quality evidence (due to risk of bias and imprecision) from two studies (n = 120) indicated uncertainty about whether exercise compared to no treatment improved pinch strength (in kg) in the short term. The MD and relative change for the left and right hands were 0.51 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.9) and 44% (95% CI 11% to 78%); and 0.82 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.21) and 68% (95% CI 36% to 101%).High-quality evidence from one study showed that exercise compared to usual care has little or no benefit on mean pinch strength of both hands in the medium (MD 0.3, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.74; n = 396) and long term (MD 0.4, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.88; n = 351). The relative changes were 8% (95% CI -4% to 19%) and 10% (95% CI -2% to 22%).No study evaluated the American College of Rheumatology 50 criteria.Moderate-quality evidence (due to risk of bias) from one study indicated that people who also received exercise with strategies for adherence were probably more adherent than those who received routine care alone in the medium term (risk ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.48; n = 438) and NNTB 6 (95% CI 4 to 10). In the long term, the risk ratio was 1.09 (95% CI 0.93 to 1.28; n = 422).Moderate-quality evidence (due to risk of bias) from one study (n = 246) indicated no adverse events with exercising. The other six studies did not report adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
It is uncertain whether exercise improves hand function or pain in the short term. It probably slightly improves function but has little or no difference on pain in the medium and long term. It is uncertain whether exercise improves grip and pinch strength in the short term, and probably has little or no difference in the medium and long term. The ACR50 response is unknown. People who received exercise with adherence strategies were probably more adherent in the medium term than who did not receive exercise, but with little or no difference in the long term. Hand exercise probably does not lead to adverse events. Future research should consider hand and wrist function as their primary outcome, describe exercise following the TIDieR guidelines, and evaluate behavioural strategies.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Exercise Therapy; Hand; Hand Strength; Humans; Middle Aged; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 30063798
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003832.pub3 -
Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery Mar 2018Surgical and conservative methods have been reported by various studies for high rates of fracture union and subsequent regain of function among patients with... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Surgical versus Conservative Treatments for Acute Undisplaced or Minimally-Displaced Scaphoid Fractures.
BACKGROUND
Surgical and conservative methods have been reported by various studies for high rates of fracture union and subsequent regain of function among patients with undisplaced or minimally-displaced scaphoid fractures. Hence, this study aims to analyze the best available evidence to comprehend the relative benefits and risks of these therapeutic options.
METHODS
A systematic search of the literature from different databases and search engines was performed with strict eligibility criteria to obtain the highest quality of evidence. All randomized controlled trials delineating the outcomes of surgical versus conservative treatments for acute undisplaced or minimally-displaced scaphoid fractures were included and then evaluated using scoring tools: Cochrane risk of bias tool and PEDro scale. Data were pooled using random-effects models with standard mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous variables.
RESULTS
The search yielded 339 potentially related articles, further trimmed down to eight studies based on the eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis revealed that surgical treatment resulted in significantly better functional outcomes than conservative treatment. Furthermore, surgery resulted in the prevention of delayed union of fractures and reduction of time needed to return to work.
CONCLUSIONS
While four studies reported advantages of surgical treatment, evidence was insufficient to provide a definitive conclusion that surgery is a better option. Due to the significant limitations with respect to certain variables, the superiority of one method to the other could not be established.
Topics: Conservative Treatment; Fracture Healing; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Pinch Strength; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Range of Motion, Articular; Recovery of Function; Return to Work; Scaphoid Bone; Time Factors
PubMed: 29564049
DOI: 10.4055/cios.2018.10.1.64 -
Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation... Mar 2018People with type 2 diabetes mellitus frequently show complications in feet and hands. However, the literature has mostly focused on foot complications. The disease can... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
People with type 2 diabetes mellitus frequently show complications in feet and hands. However, the literature has mostly focused on foot complications. The disease can affect the strength and dexterity of the hands, thereby reducing function.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review and meta-analysis focused on identifying the existing evidence on how type 2 diabetes mellitus affects hand strength, dexterity and function.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE via PubMed, CINHAL, Scopus and Web of Science, and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials for reports of studies of grip and pinch strength as well as hand dexterity and function evaluated by questionnaires comparing patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and healthy controls that were published between 1990 and 2017. Data are reported as standardized mean difference (SMD) or mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Among 2077 records retrieved, only 7 full-text articles were available for meta-analysis. For both the dominant and non-dominant hand, type 2 diabetes mellitus negatively affected grip strength (SMD: -1.03; 95% CI: -2.24 to 0.18 and -1.37, -3.07 to 0.33) and pinch strength (-1.09, -2.56 to 0.38 and -1.12, -2.73 to 0.49), although not significantly. Dexterity of the dominant hand did not differ between diabetes and control groups but was poorer for the non-dominant hand, although not significantly. Hand function was worse for diabetes than control groups in 2 studies (MD: -8.7; 95% CI: -16.88 to -1.52 and 4.69, 2.03 to 7.35).
CONCLUSION
This systematic review with meta-analysis suggested reduced hand function, specifically grip and pinch strength, for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus versus healthy controls. However, the sample size for all studies was low. Hence, we need studies with adequate sample size and randomized controlled trials to provide statistically significant results.
Topics: Aged; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Neuropathies; Female; Hand Strength; Humans; Male; Middle Aged
PubMed: 29366905
DOI: 10.1016/j.rehab.2017.12.006 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2017The role of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in the management of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is controversial. While some trials have shown distinct advantages of LLLT... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The role of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in the management of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is controversial. While some trials have shown distinct advantages of LLLT over placebo and some other non-surgical treatments, other trials have not.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of LLLT versus placebo and versus other non-surgical interventions in the management of CTS.
SEARCH METHODS
On 9 December 2016 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index Expanded for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also searched clinical trial registries for ongoing studies. We checked the references of primary studies and review articles, and contacted trial authors for additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered for inclusion RCTs (irrespective of blinding, publication status or language) comparing LLLT versus placebo or non-surgical treatment for the management of CTS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently identified trials for inclusion and extracted the data. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects model, calculated using Review Manager. For dichotomous data, we reported risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 22 trials randomising 1153 participants that were eligible for inclusion; nine trials (525 participants, 256 randomised to LLLT) compared LLLT with placebo, two (150 participants, 75 randomised to LLLT) compared LLLT with ultrasound, one compared LLLT with placebo and LLLT with ultrasound, two compared LLLT with steroid injection, and one trial each compared LLLT with other non-surgical interventions: fascial manipulation, application of a pulsed magnetic field, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), steroid injection, tendon gliding exercises, and applying a wrist splint combined with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Three studies compared LLLT as part of multiple interventions. Risk of bias varied across the studies, but was high or unclear in most assessed domains in most studies. Most studies were small, with few events, and effect estimates were generally imprecise and inconsistent; the combination of these factors led us to categorise the quality of evidence for most outcomes as very low or, for a small number, low. At short-term follow-up (less than three months), there was very low-quality evidence for any effect over placebo of LLLT on CTS for the primary outcome of Symptom Severity Score (scale 1 to 5, higher score represents worsening; MD -0.36, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.06) or Functional Status Scale (scale 1 to 5, higher score represents worsened disability; MD -0.56, 95% CI -1.03 to -0.09). At short-term (less than three months) follow-up, we are uncertain whether LLLT results in a greater improvement than placebo in visual analogue score (VAS) pain (scale 0 to 10, higher score represents worsening; MD -1.47, 95% CI -2.36 to -0.58) and several aspects of nerve conduction studies (motor nerve latency: higher score represents worsening; MD -0.09 ms, 95% CI -0.16 to -0.03; range 3.1 ms to 4.99 ms; sensory nerve latency: MD -0.10 ms, 95% CI -0.15 to -0.06; range 1.8 ms to 3.9 ms), as the quality of the evidence was very low. When compared with placebo at short-term follow-up, LLLT may slightly improve grip strength (MD 2.58 kg, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.95; range 14.2 kg to 25.23 kg) and finger-pinch strength (MD 0.94 kg, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.44; range 4.35 kg to 5.7 kg); however, the quality of evidence was low. Only VAS pain and finger-pinch strength results reached the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) as previously published. We are uncertain about the effect of LLLT in comparison to ultrasound at short-term follow-up for improvement in VAS pain (MD 2.81, 95% CI 1.21 to 4.40) and motor nerve latency (MD 0.61 ms, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.95), as the quality of evidence was very low. When compared with ultrasound at short-term follow-up, LLLT may result in slightly less improvement in finger-pinch strength (MD -0.71 kg, 95% CI -0.94 to -0.49) and motor nerve amplitude (MD -1.90 mV, 95% CI -3.63 to -0.18; range 7.10 mV to 9.70 mV); however, the quality of evidence was low. There was insufficient evidence to assess the long-term benefits of LLLT versus placebo or ultrasound. There was insufficient evidence to show whether LLLT is better or worse in the management of CTS than other non-surgical interventions. For all outcomes reported within these other comparisons, the quality of evidence was very low. There was insufficient evidence to assess adverse events, as only one study reported this outcome.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence is of very low quality and we found no data to support any clinical effect of LLLT in treating CTS. Only VAS pain and finger-pinch strength met previously published MCIDs but these are likely to be overestimates of effect given the small studies and significant risk of bias. There is low or very low-quality evidence to suggest that LLLT is less effective than ultrasound in the management of CTS based on short-term, clinically significant improvements in pain and finger-pinch strength. There is insufficient evidence to support LLLT being better or worse than any other type of non-surgical treatment in the management of CTS. Any further research of LLLT should be definitive, blinded, and of high quality.
PubMed: 35611937
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012765 -
The Bone & Joint Journal Jan 2017We performed a systematic review of the current literature regarding the outcomes of unconstrained metacarpophalangeal joint (MCPJ) arthroplasty. (Review)
Review
AIMS
We performed a systematic review of the current literature regarding the outcomes of unconstrained metacarpophalangeal joint (MCPJ) arthroplasty.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We initially identified 1305 studies, and 406 were found to be duplicates. After exclusion criteria were applied, seven studies were included. Outcomes extracted included pre- and post-operative pain visual analogue scores, range of movement (ROM), strength of pinch and grip, satisfaction and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Clinical and radiological complications were recorded. The results are presented in three groups based on the design of the arthroplasty and the aetiology (pyrocarbon-osteoarthritis (pyro-OA), pyrocarbon-inflammatory arthritis (pyro-IA), metal-on-polyethylene (MoP)).
RESULTS
Results show that pyrocarbon implants provide an 85% reduction in pain, 144% increase of pinch grip and 13° improvements in ROM for both OA and IA combined. Patients receiving MoP arthroplasties had a reduction in pinch strength. Satisfaction rates were 91% and 92% for pyrocarbon-OA and pyrocarbon-IA groups, respectively. There were nine failures in 87 joints (10.3%) over a mean follow-up of 5.5 years (1.0 to 14.3) for pyro-OA. There were 18 failures in 149 joints (12.1%) over a mean period of 6.6 years (1.0 to 16.0) for pyro-IA. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of the studies and the limited presentation of data.
CONCLUSION
We would recommend prospective data collection for small joint arthroplasties of the hand consisting of PROMs that would allow clinicians to come to stronger conclusions about the impact on function of replacing the MCPJs. A national joint registry may be the best way to achieve this. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:100-6.
Topics: Arthroplasty; Carbon; Hand Strength; Humans; Metacarpophalangeal Joint; Musculoskeletal Pain; Osteoarthritis; Patient Satisfaction; Prospective Studies; Prostheses and Implants; Prosthesis Failure; Range of Motion, Articular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28053264
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B1.37237 -
Industrial Health 2015The purpose was to systematically review the published reports for the clinical utility of quantitative objective tests commonly used for diagnosing musculoskeletal... (Review)
Review
The purpose was to systematically review the published reports for the clinical utility of quantitative objective tests commonly used for diagnosing musculoskeletal disorders in hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS). Two reviewers independently conducted a computerized literature search in PubMed and Scopus using predefined criteria, and relevant papers were identified. The articles were screened in several stages and considered for final inclusion. Quality of the selected papers was evaluated by a modified QUADAS tool. Relevant data were extracted as necessary. For this review, only 4 relevant studies could be identified for detailed examination. Grip strength, pinch strength, and Purdue pegboard tests were commonly used with their reported sensitivity and specificity ranging between 1.7 to 65.7% and 65.2 to 100%, 1.7 to 40% and 94 to 100%, and 44.8 to 85% and 78 to 95%, respectively. A considerable difference across the studies was observed with respect to patient and control populations, diagnostic performance and cut-off values of different tests. Overall, currently available English-language limited literature do not provide enough evidence in favour of the application of grip strength and pinch strength tests for diagnosing musculoskeletal injuries in HAVS; Purdue pegboard test seems to have some diagnostic value in evaluating impaired dexterity in HAVS.
Topics: Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures; Hand Strength; Hand-Arm Vibration Syndrome; Humans; Motor Skills; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Pinch Strength; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 26051288
DOI: 10.2486/indhealth.2014-0221 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Apr 2013Dupuytren's disease of the hand is a common condition affecting the palmar fascia, resulting in progressive flexion deformities of the digits and hence limitation of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dupuytren's disease of the hand is a common condition affecting the palmar fascia, resulting in progressive flexion deformities of the digits and hence limitation of hand function. The optimal treatment remains unclear as outcomes studies have used a variety of measures for assessment.
METHODS
A literature search was performed for all publications describing surgical treatment, percutaneous needle aponeurotomy or collagenase injection for primary or recurrent Dupuytren's disease where outcomes had been monitored using functional measures.
RESULTS
Ninety-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two studies reported outcomes using patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) ranging from validated questionnaires to self-reported measures for return to work and self-rated disability. The Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score was the most utilised patient-reported function measure (n=11). Patient satisfaction was reported by eighteen studies but no single method was used consistently. Range of movement was the most frequent physical measure and was reported in all 91 studies. However, the methods of measurement and reporting varied, with seventeen different techniques being used. Other physical measures included grip and pinch strength and sensibility, again with variations in measurement protocols. The mean follow-up time ranged from 2 weeks to 17 years.
CONCLUSIONS
There is little consistency in the reporting of outcomes for interventions in patients with Dupuytren's disease, making it impossible to compare the efficacy of different treatment modalities. Although there are limitations to the existing generic patient reported outcomes measures, a combination of these together with a disease-specific questionnaire, and physical measures of active and passive individual joint Range of movement (ROM), grip and sensibility using standardised protocols should be used for future outcomes studies. As Dupuytren's disease tends to recur following treatment as well as extend to involve other areas of the hand, follow-up times should be standardised and designed to capture both short and long term outcomes.
Topics: Clinical Trials as Topic; Dupuytren Contracture; Forecasting; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 23575442
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-131 -
Hand (New York, N.Y.) Sep 2011Toe-to-thumb transfer is an established procedure for reconstruction of traumatic thumb amputations. The four types of toe-to-thumb transfers are the second toe, the...
BACKGROUND
Toe-to-thumb transfer is an established procedure for reconstruction of traumatic thumb amputations. The four types of toe-to-thumb transfers are the second toe, the great toe, the wrap-around great toe and the trimmed great toe transfers. The purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the literature to compare outcomes amongst different methods of toe-to-thumb transfers.
METHODS
A literature search using 'toe-to-thumb transfer' combined with 'thumb injury' and 'thumb reconstruction' as keywords and limited to humans and the English language identified 633 studies. Studies were included in the review if they: (1) present primary data, (2) report three or more toe-to-thumb transfers for isolated complete traumatic thumb amputation between the metacarpophalangeal joint and the interphalangeal joint (both excluded) and (3) present functional outcome data.
RESULTS
Twenty-five studies representing 450 toe-to-thumb transfers met the inclusion criteria. They included 101 second toe transfers, 196 great toe transfers, 122 wrap-around transfers and 31 trimmed toe transfers. The mean survival rate was 96.4%. No statistically significant differences could be detected between the four transfers with regards to survival, arc of motion, total active motion, grip and pinch strength and static two-point discrimination.
CONCLUSIONS
All four types of toe transfer procedures have predictably high survival rates and good patient satisfaction scores. The current data are inadequate to make any comments with regards to donor site morbidity. Till such data are available, an evidence-based recommendation for the superiority of a specific type of toe-to-thumb transfer cannot be made.
PubMed: 22942845
DOI: 10.1007/s11552-011-9340-x -
The Journal of Hand Surgery Apr 2009We conducted a systematic review of the literature to summarize the available data on reconstructive surgeries involving pinch reconstruction and elbow extension... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
PURPOSE
We conducted a systematic review of the literature to summarize the available data on reconstructive surgeries involving pinch reconstruction and elbow extension restoration in people with tetraplegia.
METHODS
English-language and French-language articles and abstracts published between 1966 and February 2007, identified through MEDLINE and EMBASE searches, bibliography review, and expert consultation, were reviewed for original reports of outcomes with pinch reconstruction and elbow extension restoration in tetraplegic patients after a spinal cord injury. Two reviewers independently extracted data on patient characteristics, surgical methods, and patient outcomes.
RESULTS
Our search identified 765 articles, of which 37 met eligibility criteria (one article contained information on both elbow and pinch procedures). Results from 377 pinch reconstructions in 23 studies and 201 elbow extension restorations in 14 studies were summarized. The mean Medical Research Council score for elbow extension went from 0 to 3.3 after reconstruction. The overall mean postoperative strength measured after surgery for pinch reconstruction was 2 kg.
CONCLUSIONS
More than 500 patients having these procedures experienced a clinically important improvement for both procedures-one restoring elbow extension, and the other, pinch strength. Upper-limb surgeries markedly improved the hand function of people with tetraplegia.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Therapeutic IV.
Topics: Elbow Joint; Humans; Pinch Strength; Quadriplegia; Range of Motion, Articular; Spinal Cord Injuries; Tenodesis
PubMed: 19345872
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2008.12.002 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Nov 2007Objective assessment of motor function is frequently used to evaluate outcome after surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). However a range of outcome... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Objective assessment of motor function is frequently used to evaluate outcome after surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). However a range of outcome measures are used and there appears to be no consensus on which measure of motor function effectively captures change. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the methods used to assess motor function in randomized controlled trials of surgical interventions for CTS. A secondary aim was to evaluate which instruments reflect clinical change and are psychometrically robust.
METHODS
The bibliographic databases Medline, AMED and CINAHL were searched for randomized controlled trials of surgical interventions for CTS. Data on instruments used, methods of assessment and results of tests of motor function was extracted by two independent reviewers.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies were retrieved which included performance based assessments of motor function. Nineteen studies assessed power grip dynamometry, fourteen studies used both power and pinch grip dynamometry, eight used manual muscle testing and five assessed the presence or absence of thenar atrophy. Several studies used multiple tests of motor function. Two studies included both power and pinch strength and reported descriptive statistics enabling calculation of effect sizes to compare the relative responsiveness of grip and pinch strength within study samples. The study findings suggest that tip pinch is more responsive than lateral pinch or power grip up to 12 weeks following surgery for CTS.
CONCLUSION
Although used most frequently and known to be reliable, power and key pinch dynamometry are not the most valid or responsive tools for assessing motor outcome up to 12 weeks following surgery for CTS. Tip pinch dynamometry more specifically targets the thenar musculature and appears to be more responsive. Manual muscle testing, which in theory is most specific to the thenar musculature, may be more sensitive if assessed using a hand held dynamometer - the Rotterdam Intrinsic Handheld Myometer. However further research is needed to evaluate its reliability and responsiveness and establish the most efficient and psychometrically robust method of evaluating motor function following surgery for CTS.
Topics: Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Decompression, Surgical; Hand; Hand Strength; Humans; Muscle, Skeletal; Muscular Atrophy; Pinch Strength; Psychometrics; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 18028538
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-8-114