ArticleHand therapy2022
Driving, work, wound care and rehabilitation after carpal tunnel release: Consensus recommendations from a UK Delphi study.
Article in Hand therapy, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparative study of clinical efficacy, electrophysiological outcomes, and perioperative parameters between endoscopic carpal tunnel release and open carpal tunnel release for carpal tunnel syndrome.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2026Article
- Return to driving post upper or lower extremity orthopaedic surgical procedures: a scoping review of current published literature.EFORT open reviews · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: There is variability in the information available for patients after carpal tunnel release (CTR). We aimed to establish (i) what advice should be provided regarding return to driving after CTR; (ii) how work activities should be categorised and defined in relation to CTR, and when patients should be recommended to return to these activities; (iii) what wound care and rehabilitation advice should be provided after CTR. Methods: We developed consensus recommendations from an expert panel of hand surgeons, primary care surgeons and hand therapists using an electronic Delphi process. Participants were recruited from clinical organisations using pre-defined criteria. Delphi questionnaires included open text and tick-box responses. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and summary feedback was provided after each round. Results: There were 33 panellists (21 surgeons and 12 hand therapists), of which 27 (82%) completed all rounds. Expected return to driving was agreed as 5-14 days. Expected timescales were also agreed for return to seven selected occupational activities. Post-operative advice focused on using and moving the hand, rather than specific rehabilitation. While consensus was reached for most items, there were important areas of disagreement, including divergent views on driving with sutures in situ and the need to inform car insurers. Conclusion: Recommendations from this study expand on existing advice by including functional descriptors for occupational activities and guidance timescales generated through a formal consensus process. Areas where consensus was not reached warrant further exploration to assess whether different practices impact clinical and functional outcomes for patients.
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.