DOI 10.1016/j.jelekin.2022.102688
Comparison of clinical findings and electromyography results in patients with preliminary diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the link between EMG findings and clinical status, the Boston questionnaire and the severity of pain in patients with pre-diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome.
METHODS
A total of 85 patients (133 hands) who presented to the Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation outpatient clinic consecutively with complaints of numbness, tingling, pain and weakness in their hands were evaluated for their demographic and clinical features. After the initial evaluation, the diagnosis of CTS was confirmed by EMG. Visual analog scale (VAS), the Boston Questionnaire (Symptom Severity Scale = SSS, Functional Status Scale = FSS) and nerve conduction study results (sensory conduction velocity = SCV, distal motor latency = DML, compound muscle action potential = CMAP) were enrolled.
RESULTS
Eighty-five patients (58 female and 27 male) participated in this study yielding 133 hands (73 right hands, 60 right hands) with CTS. The mean age was 48.3 ± 10.41 years. Of all patients, 68.2 % were female and 31.8 % were male. A statistically significant relationship was found between SSS and duration of symptoms, VAS, both right and left SCV, DML and CMAP. A statistically significant relationship was found between FSS and duration of symptoms, VAS and only right SCV, DML and CMAP.
CONCLUSION
The diagnosis of CTS should be evaluated not only as an electrodiagnostic finding, but also the clinical picture of the patients. According to our results, both SSS and FSS had good correlations with VAS and the findings of EMG. Therefore, the Boston Questionnaire can provide a standardized measure of symptom severity and functional status in patients with CTS.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.