Critical Analysis of Outcome Measures Used in the Assessment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Overview

Journal Int Orthop

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2007 Mar 21

PMID 17370071

Citations 32

Authors

Senthil Nathan Sambandam

P Priyanka

Arif Gul

Balakrishnan Ilango

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Clinicians and researchers are confounded by the various outcome measures used for the assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). In this study, we critically analysed the conceptual framework, validity, reliability, responsiveness and appropriateness of some of the commonly used CTS outcome measures. Initially, we conducted an extensive literature search to identify all of the outcome measures used in the assessment of CTS patients, which revealed six different carpal tunnel outcome measures [Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ), Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire (MHQ), Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), Patient Evaluation Measure (PEM), clinical rating scale (Historical-Objective (Hi-Ob) scale) and Upper Extremity Functional Scale (UEFS)]. We analysed the construction framework, development process, validation process, reliability, internal consistency (IC), responsiveness and limitations of each of these outcome measures. Our analysis reveals that BCTQ, MHQ and PEM have comprehensive frameworks, good validity, reliability and responsiveness both in the hands of the developers, as well as independent researchers. The UEFS and Hi-Ob scale need validation and reliability testing by independent researchers. Region-specific measures like DASH have good frameworks and, hence, a potential role in the assessment of CTS but they require more validation in exclusive carpal tunnel patients.

Citing Articles

Carpal Tunnel Release With Ultrasound Guidance: Intermediate-Term Clinical Outcomes and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings.

Nicholas G, Galloway J, Hawley J, McGinley J J Hand Surg Glob Online. 2023; 5(5):595-600.

PMID: 37790816 PMC: 10543793. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsg.2023.05.002.

Comparative study of surgical wound closure with nylon interrupted sutures and running subcuticular vicryl rapide suture after open release of the carpal tunnel.

Tzimas V, Kotsias C, Galanis C, Panagiotakopoulos G, Tsiampas D, Parnis J Scars Burn Heal. 2022; 8:20595131221128951.

PMID: 36200049 PMC: 9528042. DOI: 10.1177/20595131221128951.

Dutch injection versus surgery trial in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (DISTRICTS): protocol of a randomised controlled trial comparing two treatment strategies.

Palmbergen W, de Bie R, Alleman T, Verstraete E, Jellema K, Verhagen W BMJ Open. 2022; 12(4):e057641.

PMID: 35387826 PMC: 8987748. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057641.

Clinical Utility of the 6-Item CTS, Boston-CTS, and Hand-Diagram for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

Schulze D, Nilsen K, Killingmo R, Zwart J, Grotle M Front Neurol. 2021; 12:683807.

PMID: 34385969 PMC: 8353366. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.683807.

Marrying Tendon and Nerve Gliding Exercises with Hydrodissection Following Injection for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome - A New Treatment Approach?.

Savage N, Albano J J Orthop Case Rep. 2021; 10(9):38-46.

PMID: 34169015 PMC: 8046441. DOI: 10.13107/jocr.2020.v10.i09.1896.

References

Dias J, Bhowal B, Wildin C, Thompson J . Assessing the outcome of disorders of the hand. Is the patient evaluation measure reliable, valid, responsive and without bias?. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001; 83(2):235-40. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.83b2.10838. View

Hobby J, Watts C, Elliot D . Validity and responsiveness of the patient evaluation measure as an outcome measure for carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Br. 2005; 30(4):350-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsb.2005.03.009. View

Imaeda T, Toh S, Nakao Y, Nishida J, Hirata H, Ijichi M . Validation of the Japanese Society for Surgery of the Hand version of the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire. J Orthop Sci. 2005; 10(4):353-9. PMC: 2780667. DOI: 10.1007/s00776-005-0917-5. View

Giannini F, Cioni R, Mondelli M, Padua R, Gregori B, DAmico P . A new clinical scale of carpal tunnel syndrome: validation of the measurement and clinical-neurophysiological assessment. Clin Neurophysiol. 2002; 113(1):71-7. DOI: 10.1016/s1388-2457(01)00704-0. View

Rosales R, Benseny Delgado E, de la Lastra-Bosch I . Evaluation of the Spanish version of the DASH and carpal tunnel syndrome health-related quality-of-life instruments: cross-cultural adaptation process and reliability. J Hand Surg Am. 2002; 27(2):334-43. DOI: 10.1053/jhsu.2002.30059. View

Mondelli M, Ginanneschi F, Rossi S, Reale F, Padua L, Giannini F . Inter-observer reproducibility and responsiveness of a clinical severity scale in surgically treated carpal tunnel syndrome. Acta Neurol Scand. 2002; 106(5):263-8. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0404.2002.01368.x. View

Germann G, Harth A, Wind G, Demir E . [Standardisation and validation of the German version 2.0 of the Disability of Arm, Shoulder,Hand (DASH) questionnaire]. Unfallchirurg. 2003; 106(1):13-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00113-002-0456-x. View

Gay R, Amadio P, Johnson J . Comparative responsiveness of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand, the carpal tunnel questionnaire, and the SF-36 to clinical change after carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Am. 2003; 28(2):250-4. DOI: 10.1053/jhsu.2003.50043. View

Gummesson C, Atroshi I, Ekdahl C . The disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) outcome questionnaire: longitudinal construct validity and measuring self-rated health change after surgery. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003; 4:11. PMC: 165599. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-4-11. View

10.

Bindra R, Dias J, Heras-Palau C, Amadio P, Chung K, Burke F . Assessing outcome after hand surgery: the current state. J Hand Surg Br. 2003; 28(4):289-94. DOI: 10.1016/s0266-7681(03)00108-6. View

11.

Schuind F, Mouraux D, Robert C, Brassinne E, Remy P, Salvia P . Functional and outcome evaluation of the hand and wrist. Hand Clin. 2003; 19(3):361-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0749-0712(03)00026-x. View

12.

Greenslade J, Mehta R, Belward P, Warwick D . Dash and Boston questionnaire assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome outcome: what is the responsiveness of an outcome questionnaire?. J Hand Surg Br. 2004; 29(2):159-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsb.2003.10.010. View

13.

Landis J, Koch G . The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977; 33(1):159-74. View

14.

Levine D, Simmons B, Koris M, Daltroy L, Hohl G, Fossel A . A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993; 75(11):1585-92. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199311000-00002. View

15.

Macey A, Burke F, Abbott K, Barton N, BRADBURY E, Bradley A . Outcomes of hand surgery. British Society for Surgery of the Hand. J Hand Surg Br. 1995; 20(6):841-55. DOI: 10.1016/s0266-7681(95)80059-x. View

16.

Hudak P, Amadio P, Bombardier C . Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med. 1996; 29(6):602-8. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:6<602::AID-AJIM4>3.0.CO;2-L. View

17.

Pransky G, Feuerstein M, Himmelstein J, Katz J . Measuring functional outcomes in work-related upper extremity disorders. Development and validation of the Upper Extremity Function Scale. J Occup Environ Med. 1998; 39(12):1195-202. DOI: 10.1097/00043764-199712000-00014. View

18.

Atroshi I, Johnsson R, Ornstein E . Patient satisfaction and return to work after endoscopic carpal tunnel surgery. J Hand Surg Am. 1998; 23(1):58-65. DOI: 10.1016/S0363-5023(98)80090-7. View

19.

Chung K, Pillsbury M, Walters M, Hayward R . Reliability and validity testing of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire. J Hand Surg Am. 1998; 23(4):575-87. DOI: 10.1016/S0363-5023(98)80042-7. View

20.

Chung K, Hamill J, Walters M, Hayward R . The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ): assessment of responsiveness to clinical change. Ann Plast Surg. 1999; 42(6):619-22. DOI: 10.1097/00000637-199906000-00006. View