Izadi Sadegh, Kardeh Bahareh, Hooshiar Seied Saeed Hosini, Neydavoodi Mojtaba, Borhani-Haghighi Afshin
Clinical Neurology Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Department of Neurology, Medical School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Scand J Pain. 2018 Jul 26;18(3):345-350. doi: 10.1515/sjpain-2017-0164.
Background and aims Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common debilitating condition. As the reliability of CTS-specific physical tests and its clinical grading remain a matter of debate, we determined the correlations between these assessments with nerve conduction study (NCS). Methods In this cross-sectional study, patients with uni or bilateral CTS, which was confirmed in electrodiagnosis, were enrolled. Clinical grading was based on the modified criteria of the Italian CTS Study Group. Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and Boston Questionnaire (BQ) were used. Physical tests [Phalen's, reverse Phalen's, Tinel's and manual carpal compression test (mCCT)] were performed by a single blinded neurologist. A p-value<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results A total of 100 patients (age=47.48±11.44 years; 85% female) with 181 involved hands were studied. The majority of hands (59.7%) were classified as grade 2 of clinical grading. On NCS, hands with mild (64%), moderate (27%) and severe (9%) CTS were identified. Sensory (velocity, latency and amplitude) and motor parameters (latency and amplitude) were significantly correlated with clinical grades (p-value<0.001). The correlation of NPRS (p-value=0.009) and BQ (p-value<0.001) scores with NCS was significant. None of the physical tests were significantly correlated with NCS in terms of result or duration (p-value>0.05). Conclusions We found that physical tests are not a reliable screening method for evaluation of CTS severity. However, the BQ and clinical grading can be more valuable due to their significant correlation with NCS. Implications Physicians might benefit from employing clinical grading and BQ in practice for better assessment of CTS severity.
背景与目的 腕管综合征(CTS)是一种常见的致残性疾病。由于CTS特异性体格检查的可靠性及其临床分级仍存在争议,我们确定了这些评估与神经传导研究(NCS)之间的相关性。方法 在这项横断面研究中,纳入了经电诊断确诊为单侧或双侧CTS的患者。临床分级基于意大利CTS研究组的改良标准。使用数字疼痛评分量表(NPRS)和波士顿问卷(BQ)。体格检查[Phalen试验、反向Phalen试验、Tinel试验和手动腕管压迫试验(mCCT)]由一名单盲神经科医生进行。p值<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。结果 共研究了100例患者(年龄=47.48±11.44岁;85%为女性),涉及181只手。大多数手(59.7%)被归类为临床分级2级。在NCS中,确定了轻度(64%)、中度(27%)和重度(9%)CTS的手。感觉(速度、潜伏期和波幅)和运动参数(潜伏期和波幅)与临床分级显著相关(p值<0.001)。NPRS(p值=0.009)和BQ(p值<0.001)评分与NCS的相关性显著。就结果或持续时间而言,没有一项体格检查与NCS显著相关(p值>0.05)。结论 我们发现体格检查不是评估CTS严重程度的可靠筛查方法。然而,由于BQ和临床分级与NCS显著相关,它们可能更有价值。意义 医生在实践中采用临床分级和BQ可能有助于更好地评估CTS严重程度。