ArticleJournal of hand and microsurgery2017
Motor Examination in the Diagnosis of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.
Article in Journal of hand and microsurgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Pronation Compensation Sign" as a New Diagnostic Tool for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Prospective Preliminary Study.Journal of pain research · 2024Article
- Neurostimulation in severe carpal tunnel release: A more precise technique for opponensplasty decision-making.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The relative importance and use of motor evaluation to diagnose carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is not clear. Because the ulnar nerve is not affected in CTS, we evaluated comparing the strength of the median-nerve innervated muscles to the ulnar innervated muscles in the same patient, through manual muscle testing (MMT) and a handheld dynamometer. Our purpose was to evaluate whether this method, which takes into account patient-dependent factors that would affect both groups of muscles equally, can provide better assessment of CTS. A retrospective case-control review of MMT and dynamometer-measured strength for CTS was performed. The study was performed retrospectively but prior to surgery or other treatment. There were 28 cases (CTS) and 14 controls (without CTS). Positive nerve conduction tests defined cases. MMT of the thenar musculature was found to be unreliable as a test for CTS. Comparisons to ulnar nerve innervated muscle strength did not improve sensitivity or specificity of the MMT examination. Use of the dynamometer improved sensitivity and specificity of motor testing in CTS over MMT. Motor evaluation is important for the diagnosis of CTS, but further study is warranted, specifically to define the method of motor evaluation and delineate the subgroup of patients (predominantly thenar motor presentation) that would benefit most from motor testing and motor-focused treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.