» Articles » PMID: 18426564

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and the "double Crush" Hypothesis: a Review and Implications for Chiropractic

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2008 Apr 23
PMID 18426564
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Upton and McComas claimed that most patients with carpal tunnel syndrome not only have compressive lesions at the wrist, but also show evidence of damage to cervical nerve roots. This "double crush" hypothesis has gained some popularity among chiropractors because it seems to provide a rationale for adjusting the cervical spine in treating carpal tunnel syndrome. Here I examine use of the concept by chiropractors, summarize findings from the literature, and critique several studies aimed at supporting or refuting the hypothesis. Although the hypothesis also has been applied to nerve compressions other than those leading to carpal tunnel syndrome, this discussion mainly examines the original application - "double crush" involving both cervical spinal nerve roots and the carpal tunnel. I consider several categories: experiments to create double crush syndrome in animals, case reports, literature reviews, and alternatives to the original hypothesis. A significant percentage of patients with carpal tunnel syndrome also have neck pain or cervical nerve root compression, but the relationship has not been definitively explained. The original hypothesis remains controversial and is probably not valid, at least for sensory disturbances, in carpal tunnel syndrome. However, even if the original hypothesis is importantly flawed, evaluation of multiple sites still may be valuable. The chiropractic profession should develop theoretical models to relate cervical dysfunction to carpal tunnel syndrome, and might incorporate some alternatives to the original hypothesis. I intend this review as a starting point for practitioners, educators, and students wishing to advance chiropractic concepts in this area.

Citing Articles

Effects of 1-hour computer use on ulnar and median nerve conduction velocity and muscle activity in office workers.

Threesittidath K, Chaibal S, Nitayarak H J Occup Health. 2024; 66(1).

PMID: 38710168 PMC: 11195575. DOI: 10.1093/joccuh/uiae023.


Current Insights into Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Clinical Strategies for Prevention and Treatment.

Chaudhary R, Khanna J, Bansal S, Bansal N Curr Drug Targets. 2024; 25(4):221-240.

PMID: 38385490 DOI: 10.2174/0113894501280331240213063333.


Interventional treatment for neuropathic pain due to combined cervical radiculopathy and carpal tunnel syndrome: a case report.

Vigneri S, Sindaco G, Zanella M, Sette E, Tugnoli V, Pari G Clin Case Rep. 2017; 5(4):414-418.

PMID: 28396759 PMC: 5378831. DOI: 10.1002/ccr3.840.


The Relationship between Nerve Conduction Study and Clinical Grading of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

Srikanteswara P, Cheluvaiah J, Agadi J, Nagaraj K J Clin Diagn Res. 2016; 10(7):OC13-8.

PMID: 27630881 PMC: 5020228. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/20607.8097.


Pathophysiology of carpal tunnel syndrome.

Aboonq M Neurosciences (Riyadh). 2015; 20(1):4-9.

PMID: 25630774 PMC: 4727604.


References
1.
Flatt D . Resolution of a double Crush syndrome. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1994; 17(6):395-7. View

2.
Wilbourn A, Gilliatt R . Double-crush syndrome: a critical analysis. Neurology. 1997; 49(1):21-9. DOI: 10.1212/wnl.49.1.21. View

3.
Mariano K, McDougle M, Tanksley G . Double crush syndrome: chiropractic care of an entrapment neuropathy. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1991; 14(4):262-5. View

4.
Valente R, Gibson H . Chiropractic manipulation in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1994; 17(4):246-9. View

5.
de Leon R, Auyong S . Chiropractic manipulative therapy of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Chiropr Med. 2009; 1(2):75-8. PMC: 2646925. DOI: 10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60007-X. View