Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37366626›Full record

SynthesisPhysical therapy2023

Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Provocative Maneuvers for the Diagnosis of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Armaghan Dabbagh, Joy C MacDermid, Joshua Yong, Tara L Packham, Ruby Grewal, Eleni C Boutsikari

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Physical therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Carpal tunnel syndrome.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Armaghan DabbaghFaculty of Health Sciences, School of Physical Therapy, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Joy C MacDermidFaculty of Health Sciences, School of Physical Therapy, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Joshua YongOccupational Therapy Department, Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore.
Tara L PackhamSchool of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Ruby GrewalFaculty of Health Sciences, School of Physical Therapy, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Eleni C BoutsikariDepartment of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
McMaster University · CAWestern University · CANational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GRSengkang General Hospital · SG

Funding

CIHR 167284
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to summarize and evaluate the research on the accuracy of provocative maneuvers to diagnose carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).

methodsThe MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched, and studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of at least 1 provocative test for CTS were selected. Study characteristics and data about the diagnostic accuracy of the provocative tests for CTS were extracted. A random-effects meta-analysis of the sensitivity (Sn) and specificity (Sp) of the Phalen test and Tinel sign was conducted. The risk of bias (ROB) was rated using the QUADAS-2 tool.

resultsThirty-one studies that assessed 12 provocative maneuvers were included. The Phalen test and the Tinel sign were the 2 most assessed tests (in 22 and 20 studies, respectively). The ROB was unclear or low in 20 studies, and at least 1 item was rated as having high ROB in 11 studies. Based on a meta-analysis of 7 studies (604 patients), the Phalen test had a pooled Sn of 0.57 (95% CI = 0.44-0.68; range = 0.12-0.92) and a pooled Sp of 0.67 (95% CI = 0.52-0.79; range = 0.30-0.95). For the Tinel sign (7 studies, 748 patients), the pooled Sn was 0.45 (95% CI = 0.34-0.57; range = 0.17-0.97) and the pooled Sp was 0.78 (95% CI = 0.60-0.89; range = 0.40-0.92). Other provocative maneuvers were less frequently studied and had conflicting diagnostic accuracies.

conclusionMeta-analyses are imprecise but suggest that the Phalen test has moderate Sn and Sp, whereas the Tinel test has low Sn and high Sp. Clinicians should combine provocative maneuvers with sensorimotor tests, hand diagrams, and diagnostic questionnaires to achieve better overall diagnostic accuracy rather than relying on individual clinical tests. IMPACT: Evidence of unclear and high ROB do not support the use of any single provocative maneuver for the diagnosis of CTS. Clinicians should consider a combination of noninvasive clinical diagnostic tests as the first choice for the diagnosis of CTS.

Indexed as

Carpal Tunnel SyndromeDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHandHumansSensitivity and SpecificitySurveys and QuestionnairesCarpal Tunnel SyndromeDiagnostic AccuracyPhalen TestProvocative TestsSystematic ReviewTinel Sign

Identifiers

PMID37366626
PMCPMC10294560
OpenAlexW4323865442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.