The journal of hand surgery Asian-Pacific volume · 2017
An Experimental Survey on the Effect of Using the CTS-6 Tool on the Diagnosis of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome by Hand Surgeons.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Hutchison Richard L, Hutchison Alan L, Hirthler Maureen A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This controlled randomized experiment tested the research hypothesis that providing the CTS-6 quantitative diagnostic information to hand surgeons affects the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome.
METHODS: Surgeon members of American Association for Hand Surgery participated in an online survey. Demographic and practice pattern information was collected. Few surgeons routinely use diagnostic questionnaires or algorithms. Each member was given four clinical scenarios. The respondents were randomized, The experimental group was given the same scenarios as the control group plus the quantitative results of the CTS-6 diagnostic tool.
RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences between the groups in the diagnostic decisions. Using the CTS-6 quantitative diagnostic tool affected the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome, especially for patients with the lowest number of findings associated with carpal tunnel syndrome.
CONCLUSIONS: While accurate diagnostic decisions are dependent on the incorporation of all of the pertinent information gathered during the history and physical exams, the results of the CTS-6 may help the clinician focus their thinking and revise their diagnostic probabilities.
METHODS: Surgeon members of American Association for Hand Surgery participated in an online survey. Demographic and practice pattern information was collected. Few surgeons routinely use diagnostic questionnaires or algorithms. Each member was given four clinical scenarios. The respondents were randomized, The experimental group was given the same scenarios as the control group plus the quantitative results of the CTS-6 diagnostic tool.
RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences between the groups in the diagnostic decisions. Using the CTS-6 quantitative diagnostic tool affected the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome, especially for patients with the lowest number of findings associated with carpal tunnel syndrome.
CONCLUSIONS: While accurate diagnostic decisions are dependent on the incorporation of all of the pertinent information gathered during the history and physical exams, the results of the CTS-6 may help the clinician focus their thinking and revise their diagnostic probabilities.