-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2019Strength training or aerobic exercise programmes, or both, might optimise muscle and cardiorespiratory function and prevent additional disuse atrophy and deconditioning... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Strength training or aerobic exercise programmes, or both, might optimise muscle and cardiorespiratory function and prevent additional disuse atrophy and deconditioning in people with a muscle disease. This is an update of a review first published in 2004 and last updated in 2013. We undertook an update to incorporate new evidence in this active area of research.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of strength training and aerobic exercise training in people with a muscle disease.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Neuromuscular's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL in November 2018 and clinical trials registries in December 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs or cross-over RCTs comparing strength or aerobic exercise training, or both lasting at least six weeks, to no training in people with a well-described muscle disease diagnosis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 14 trials of aerobic exercise, strength training, or both, with an exercise duration of eight to 52 weeks, which included 428 participants with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD), dermatomyositis, polymyositis, mitochondrial myopathy, Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), or myotonic dystrophy. Risk of bias was variable, as blinding of participants was not possible, some trials did not blind outcome assessors, and some did not use an intention-to-treat analysis. Strength training compared to no training (3 trials) For participants with FSHD (35 participants), there was low-certainty evidence of little or no effect on dynamic strength of elbow flexors (MD 1.2 kgF, 95% CI -0.2 to 2.6), on isometric strength of elbow flexors (MD 0.5 kgF, 95% CI -0.7 to 1.8), and ankle dorsiflexors (MD 0.4 kgF, 95% CI -2.4 to 3.2), and on dynamic strength of ankle dorsiflexors (MD -0.4 kgF, 95% CI -2.3 to 1.4). For participants with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (35 participants), there was very low-certainty evidence of a slight improvement in isometric wrist extensor strength (MD 8.0 N, 95% CI 0.7 to 15.3) and of little or no effect on hand grip force (MD 6.0 N, 95% CI -6.7 to 18.7), pinch grip force (MD 1.0 N, 95% CI -3.3 to 5.3) and isometric wrist flexor force (MD 7.0 N, 95% CI -3.4 to 17.4). Aerobic exercise training compared to no training (5 trials) For participants with DMD there was very low-certainty evidence regarding the number of leg revolutions (MD 14.0, 95% CI -89.0 to 117.0; 23 participants) or arm revolutions (MD 34.8, 95% CI -68.2 to 137.8; 23 participants), during an assisted six-minute cycle test, and very low-certainty evidence regarding muscle strength (MD 1.7, 95% CI -1.9 to 5.3; 15 participants). For participants with FSHD, there was low-certainty evidence of improvement in aerobic capacity (MD 1.1 L/min, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.8, 38 participants) and of little or no effect on knee extension strength (MD 0.1 kg, 95% CI -0.7 to 0.9, 52 participants). For participants with dermatomyositis and polymyositis (14 participants), there was very low-certainty evidence regarding aerobic capacity (MD 14.6, 95% CI -1.0 to 30.2). Combined aerobic exercise and strength training compared to no training (6 trials) For participants with juvenile dermatomyositis (26 participants) there was low-certainty evidence of an improvement in knee extensor strength on the right (MD 36.0 N, 95% CI 25.0 to 47.1) and left (MD 17 N 95% CI 0.5 to 33.5), but low-certainty evidence of little or no effect on maximum force of hip flexors on the right (MD -9.0 N, 95% CI -22.4 to 4.4) or left (MD 6.0 N, 95% CI -6.6 to 18.6). This trial also provided low-certainty evidence of a slight decrease of aerobic capacity (MD -1.2 min, 95% CI -1.6 to 0.9). For participants with dermatomyositis and polymyositis (21 participants), we found very low-certainty evidence for slight increases in muscle strength as measured by dynamic strength of knee extensors on the right (MD 2.5 kg, 95% CI 1.8 to 3.3) and on the left (MD 2.7 kg, 95% CI 2.0 to 3.4) and no clear effect in isometric muscle strength of eight different muscles (MD 1.0, 95% CI -1.1 to 3.1). There was very low-certainty evidence that there may be an increase in aerobic capacity, as measured with time to exhaustion in an incremental cycle test (17.5 min, 95% CI 8.0 to 27.0) and power performed at VO max (maximal oxygen uptake) (18 W, 95% CI 15.0 to 21.0). For participants with mitochondrial myopathy (18 participants), we found very low-certainty evidence regarding shoulder muscle (MD -5.0 kg, 95% CI -14.7 to 4.7), pectoralis major muscle (MD 6.4 kg, 95% CI -2.9 to 15.7), and anterior arm muscle strength (MD 7.3 kg, 95% CI -2.9 to 17.5). We found very low-certainty evidence regarding aerobic capacity, as measured with mean time cycled (MD 23.7 min, 95% CI 2.6 to 44.8) and mean distance cycled until exhaustion (MD 9.7 km, 95% CI 1.5 to 17.9). One trial in myotonic dystrophy type 1 (35 participants) did not provide data on muscle strength or aerobic capacity following combined training. In this trial, muscle strength deteriorated in one person and one person had worse daytime sleepiness (very low-certainty evidence). For participants with FSHD (16 participants), we found very low-certainty evidence regarding muscle strength, aerobic capacity and VO peak; the results were very imprecise. Most trials reported no adverse events other than muscle soreness or joint complaints (low- to very low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence regarding strength training and aerobic exercise interventions remains uncertain. Evidence suggests that strength training alone may have little or no effect, and that aerobic exercise training alone may lead to a possible improvement in aerobic capacity, but only for participants with FSHD. For combined aerobic exercise and strength training, there may be slight increases in muscle strength and aerobic capacity for people with dermatomyositis and polymyositis, and a slight decrease in aerobic capacity and increase in muscle strength for people with juvenile dermatomyositis. More research with robust methodology and greater numbers of participants is still required.
Topics: Dermatomyositis; Exercise; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Muscle Strength; Muscular Diseases; Muscular Dystrophies; Muscular Dystrophy, Facioscapulohumeral; Myotonic Dystrophy; Physical Fitness; Polymyositis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Resistance Training
PubMed: 31808555
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003907.pub5 -
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 -
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 -
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 -
Hand (New York, N.Y.) Mar 2021To decrease the time to reinnervation of the intrinsic motor end plates after high ulnar nerve injuries, a supercharged end-to-side (SETS) anterior interosseous to...
To decrease the time to reinnervation of the intrinsic motor end plates after high ulnar nerve injuries, a supercharged end-to-side (SETS) anterior interosseous to ulnar motor nerve transfer has been proposed. The purpose of this study was to compile and review the indications, outcomes, and complications of SETS anterior interosseous to ulnar motor nerve transfer. A literature search was performed, identifying 73 papers; 4 of which met inclusion and exclusion criteria, including 78 patients. Papers included were those that contained the results of SETS between the years 2000 and 2018. Data were pooled and analyzed focusing on the primary outcomes: intrinsic muscle recovery and complications. Four studies with 78 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Most patients (33.3%) underwent SETS for an ulnar nerve lesion in continuity, the average age was 46.5 years, and the average follow-up was 10 months. The average duration of symptoms before surgery was 99 weeks, all patients had weakness and numbness, nearly all (96%) had atrophy, and half (53%) had pain. Grip and key pinch strength improved 202% and 179%, respectively, from the preoperative assessment. The vast majority (91.9%) recovered intrinsic function at an average of 3.7 months. Other than 8% of patients who did not recover intrinsic strength, no other complications were reported in any of the 78 patients. The SETS is a successful procedure with low morbidity, which may restore intrinsic function in patients with proximal nerve injuries.
Topics: Arm; Hand Strength; Humans; Middle Aged; Nerve Transfer; Ulnar Nerve; Ulnar Neuropathies
PubMed: 30924361
DOI: 10.1177/1558944719836213 -
Journal of Hand and Microsurgery Apr 2023There has been an increasing utilization of end-to-end (ETE) and reverse "supercharged" end-to-side (SETS) anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) to ulnar nerve transfers... (Review)
Review
There has been an increasing utilization of end-to-end (ETE) and reverse "supercharged" end-to-side (SETS) anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) to ulnar nerve transfers (NTs) for treatment of high ulnar nerve injury. This study aimed to review the potential indications for, and outcomes of, ETE and SETS AIN-ulnar NT. A literature review was performed, and 10 articles with 156 patients who had sufficient follow-up to evaluate functional outcomes were included. English studies were included if they reported the outcome of patients with ulnar nerve injuries treated with AIN to ulnar motor NT. Outcomes were analyzed based on the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire scores, grip and key pinch strength, and interosseous Medical Research Council-graded motor strength. Comparisons were made using the independent -test and the chi-square test. No nerve graft control group was required for eligibility. Ulnar nerve injury types varied. NT resulted in 77% of patients achieving M3+ recovery, 53.7 ± 19.8 lb grip strength recovery, 61 ± 21% key pinch recovery, and a mean DASH score of 33.4 ± 16. In this diverse group, NT resulted in significantly greater M3+ recovery and grip strength recovery measured in pounds than in the nerve graft/conventional treatment group, and ETE repairs had significantly better outcomes compared with SETS repairs for grip strength, key pinch strength, and DASH scores, but heterogeneity limits interpretation. ETE and SETS AIN-ulnar NTs produce significant restoration of ulnar nerve motor function for high ulnar nerve injuries. For ulnar nerve transection injuries at or above the elbow, ETE NT results in superior motor recovery compared with nerve grafting/conventional repair. However, further research is needed to determine the best treatment for other types of ulnar nerve injury and the role of SETS NT.
PubMed: 37020610
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1734399 -
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 -
Journal of Orthopaedics 2021Although rare, thumb Carpometacarpal (CMC) joint dislocations can have significant complications which impact hand function. Optimal management is crucial in restoring... (Review)
Review
Although rare, thumb Carpometacarpal (CMC) joint dislocations can have significant complications which impact hand function. Optimal management is crucial in restoring pinch and grasp strength, but no agreement exists regarding treatment due to a paucity of literature on this subject. Systematic review was conducted involving non-operative and operative management of the CMC joint. 15 articles with a total of 60 thumbs were evaluated from published literature. 12/60 thumbs with isolated CMC joint dislocations were treated with closed reduction, with 4 cases needing additional ligament repair due to joint instability post-reduction. 51/60 of the isolated CMC joint dislocations had ligament reconstruction, with flexor carpi radialis tendon autograft (29/51) as the most popular option. 60/60 patients regained full function and stability of the CMC joint with significant pain relief. Although good surgical outcomes have been achieved, long term clinical outcome reporting is needed to develop a standardized approach to treatment.
PubMed: 33927510
DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2021.03.015 -
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 -
Journal of Wrist Surgery Jun 2020A common notion is that more complex techniques for treating trapeziometacarpal arthritis such as ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI) better...
A common notion is that more complex techniques for treating trapeziometacarpal arthritis such as ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI) better preserve the scaphometacarpal (SMC) space compared to a simple trapeziectomy and that this leads to superior functional outcomes. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the relationship between scaphometacarpal space and objective outcomes such as grip and pinch strength as well as subjective patient-reported outcomes. A systematic review of the literature was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting SMC space and outcomes after surgery for carpometacarpal arthritis. The primary outcomes of these studies included any measure of postoperative scaphometacarpal space (trapezial height/trapezial index) as well as key pinch strength, grip strength, or lateral pinch strength. Studies that did not assess for association between SMC space and outcomes were excluded. Fourteen studies were included in this systematic review. Three (21.4%) studies found a statistically significant correlation between postoperative SMC space and postoperative pinch or grip strength. The correlation was weakly positive in one study (key pinch vs. scaphometacarpal space, = 0.13), positive but unlisted in another (lateral pinch vs. trapezial ratio), and negative in the third study (key pinch vs. trapezial space ratio, = -0.47). Preservation of the SMC space postoperatively is not associated with postoperative outcomes. Further research is necessary to better characterize the importance of maintaining the SMC space in patients undergoing LRTI in order to substantiate claims by proponents of the procedure.
PubMed: 32509434
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1692477