4.2 Article

The relationship of pre- and postoperative median and ulnar nerve conduction measures to a self-administered questionnaire in carpal tunnel syndrome

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.neucli.2012.02.133

关键词

Carpal Tunnel Release; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Nerve Conduction studies; Hand-held device; Boston Questionnaire

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Study aims. - Following carpal tunnel release (CTR), only very modest correlations have been found between subjective symptoms and function indexes compared to neurophysiological measures. The objective of this study was to evaluate this relationship by comparing the self-administered Boston symptom severity score and function severity score questionnaire against nerve conduction studies (NCS) before and after CTR using two different electrophysiological techniques. Patients and methods. - Carpal tunnel release was performed in 51 patients (62 hands). Pre-and postoperative NCS were evaluated using both conventional neurophysiological methods and by means of a new hand-held device. Results. - Preoperatively there was almost no correlation between symptom severity and function scores and NCS results. Following surgery however, both symptom severity and function showed a modest, but significant improvement in their correlation to NCS (at highest r=0.405, P<0.01). This improvement in the relation of subjective measures to neurophysiological results was seen in both median nerve sensory and motor conduction as well as in ulnar nerve motor conduction. Conclusions. - In addition to median-nerve dysfunction, it might be suggested that ulnar nerve changes can contribute to symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome in patients. Several associations were found using a median-ulnar sensory latency difference in the finger-wrist segment and a sensory conduction difference in the palm to wrist segment. Significant correlations were established by both conventional NCS and the new hand-held device. (C) 2012 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据