ArticleCureus2024
Rural-Urban Disparities in the Surgical Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome in the United States.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRural populations are at risk for poorer access to health services and lower quality care, and recent policy efforts have focused on the reduction of rural-urban health inequities. The objective of this study was to identify differences in (1) patient demographic factors, (2) the utilization of confirmatory electrodiagnostic (EDS) testing, and (3) preoperative EDS severity between rural and urban populations undergoing carpal tunnel release (CTR).
methodsWe retrospectively identified 1,297 patients who underwent CTR at a tertiary referral center from July 2008 to June 2013. Exclusion criteria were acute trauma or infection, revision surgery, incomplete medical records, neoplasm excision, and the lack of rural-urban commuting area (RUCA) code for rural-urban classification. A final cohort of 1,138 patients who underwent CTR were included. The RUCA was used to classify patients by rural or urban residence. We assessed patient demographic factors including comorbidities, the utilization of confirmatory EDS testing, and preoperative EDS severity. A bivariate screen was performed for associations between rural-urban residence and our outcome variables, and variables with p <0.05 in the bivariate screen were included in a multivariable logistic regression model.
resultsOf the 1,138 patients, 55 patients (5%) resided in a rural area and 1,083 patients (95%) resided in an urban area. No difference was found in the utilization of confirmatory EDS testing between rural and urban patients undergoing CTR. The final multivariable logistic regression model showed that rural residence was independently associated with older age, lower body mass index (BMI), and EDS-negative disease.
conclusionsRural patients undergoing CTR are more likely to have EDS-negative disease, which calls into question the effectiveness of EDS testing as a confirmatory test in this population. There is a paucity of literature on the outcomes of CTR in a rural population, and further studies are needed to ensure rural-urban equity in care.
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.