Clinical Trials

This study aims to develop an alternate technique for improving the surgical procedure of carpal tunnel release. Read More on PubMed

Most randomized trials have shown similar results with endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR); however, there are studies suggesting less postoperative pain, faster improvement in grip and pinch strength, and earlier return to work with the endoscopic technique. The goal of this study was to prospectively examine subjective and functional outcomes, satisfaction, and complications after both ECTR and OCTR in the opposite hands of the same patient, serving as their own control. Read More on PubMed

With advancement in biomechanical and biological research on idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome, the insight on the pathophysiology of carpal tunnel syndrome has gained much clinical relevance. Open carpal tunnel release is still a gold standard procedure for carpal tunnel syndrome, which has evolved into mini-open procedure with development of new devices. Endoscopic carpal tunnel release has become popular in recent practice of hand surgery with an advantage of early recovery of hand function with minimal morbidity. However, endoscopic carpal tunnel release has its own limitation such as long learning curve with obvious surgical risk reported in the literature. In this review article, various treatment protocols for idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome are presented with special highlight on endoscopic carpal tunnel release, which is gaining popularity in current practice. Read More on PubMed

To investigate the changes, trends, and implications of carpal tunnel release (CTR) surgery within an ambulatory setting over the past decade in the United States. Read More on PubMed

To review literature systematically concerning effectiveness of nonsurgical interventions for treating carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Read More on PubMed

To present an evidence-based overview of the effectiveness of surgical and postsurgical interventions to treat carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Read More on PubMed

This prospective study evaluates if the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire is an adequately responsive outcome measure in carpal tunnel syndrome by comparing it with the disease-specific Boston questionnaire (BQ). To measure responsiveness (sensitivity to clinical change), 57 patients with a clinical diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome completed the DASH and BQ preoperatively and again 3 months after open carpal tunnel decompression. A second group of 31 patients completed the questionnaires in the outpatient clinic and again 2 weeks later to assess test-retest reliability. The time to complete all questionnaires was recorded. Responsiveness of the DASH is comparable with the BQ with standardized response means of 0.66, 1.07 and 0.62 for the DASH, BQ-symptoms and BQ-function, respectively. Test-retest data show both questionnaires are reliable. Mean times to complete questionnaires were 6.8minutes (DASH) and 5.6minutes (BQ). This study concludes that the DASH questionnaire is a reliable, responsive and practical outcome instrument in carpal tunnel syndrome. Read More on PubMed

The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the prevalence and intensity of nerve compression symptoms and to estimate the prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) in the general population. A survey that included the Katz hand diagram, the Carpal Tunnel Instrument (CTI), and the Short Form-36 questionnaire was sent to 1,559 people. A short telephone survey was conducted to a random sample of 110 nonresponders to determine if they were systematically different from the responders. Of the responders 35.1% had a symptom severity (CTI subscale) score of > or =1.5. Of the responders and the nonresponders 23.2% and 14.5%, respectively, reported waking at least once per night with numbness; 37.3% of the responders and 33.6% of the nonresponders experienced pain in the hand at least once per day. As determined by the Katz hand diagrams, 58 (16.3%) of the responders had classic or probable distributions of symptoms (likely to have CTS) and 298 (83.7%) had possible and unlikely distributions. After correcting for nonresponders our lowest possible estimate of CTS prevalence in the general US population is 3.72%, indicating a larger pool of symptomatic people than previously reported. Read More on PubMed