Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?
Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 66 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 336 - 342 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 İndeks Tarihi: 30-06-2021
Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?
Öz: Objectives: This study aims to identify the optimal follow-up method for evaluation of the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).Patients and methods: Between January 2006 and December 2010, 61 hands of a total of 46 patients (7 males, 39 females; mean age 56.0±10.4 years; range, 20 to 71 years) with a diagnosis of CTS were retrospectively analyzed. All operations were performed by a single surgeon with a mini-incision distal to the transverse carpal ligament. At a mean follow-up of seven years after surgery, electromyography (EMG) was repeated for all patients. The Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ), Boston Symptom Severity Scale, Boston Functional Status Scale, palmar pinch strength, grip strength, and EMG of the patients were compared before and after surgery.Results: The mean follow-up was 84±10 (range, 72 to 104) months. There were significant improvements in the Boston Symptom and Functional Scale scores postoperatively, as well as in the grip and pinch strength. After surgery, EMG findings improved in 83.6% of the patients. However, there was no significant correlation between pre- and postoperative Boston Symptom Severity Scale scores, functional status, pinch and grip strengths, and pre- and postoperative EMG results.Conclusion: Our study results demonstrate that the symptom severity and functional status scores of the BCTQ are favorable, and this tool is reliable and easy-to-apply for the diagnosis and follow-up of CTS surgeries.
Anahtar Kelime: Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- 1. Pfeffer GB, Gelberman RH, Boyes JH, Rydevik B. The history of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Br 1988;13:28-34.
- 2. Kerr CD, Sybert DR, Albarracin NS. An analysis of the flexor synovium in idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome: report of 625 cases. J Hand Surg Am 1992;17:1028-30.
- 3. Fuchs PC, Nathan PA, Myers LD. Synovial histology in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am 1991;16:753-8.
- 4. Graham B, Regehr G, Naglie G, Wright JG. Development and validation of diagnostic criteria for carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am 2006;31:919-24.
- 5. Atroshi I, Gummesson C, Johnsson R, Ornstein E, Ranstam J, Rosén I. Prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in a general population. JAMA 1999;282:153-8.
- 6. Freilich AM, Chhabra AB. Diagnosis and pathophysiology of carpal tunnel syndrome. Current Opin Orthop 2007;18:347-51.
- 7. Levine DW, Simmons BP, Koris MJ, Daltroy LH, Hohl GG, Fossel AH, et al. A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1993;75:1585-92.
- 8. Heybeli N, Özerdemoğlu RA, Aksoy OG, Mumcu EF. Functional and symptomatic scoring used for the assessment of outcome in carpal tunnel release. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2001;35:147-51.
- 9. Padua L, LoMonaco M, Gregori B, Valente EM, Padua R, Tonali P. Neurophysiological classification and sensitivity in 500 carpal tunnel syndrome hands. Acta Neurol Scand 1997;96:211-7.
- 10. Sezgin M, Incel NA, Serhan S, Camdeviren H, As I, Erdoğan C. Assessment of symptom severity and functional status in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome: reliability and functionality of the Turkish version of the Boston Questionnaire. Disabil Rehabil 2006;28:1281-5.
- 11. Evans JD. Straightforward statistics for the behavioral sciences. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing; 1996.
- 12. Matthew P, O'Connor D, Pitt V, Massy-Westropp N. Exercise and mobilisation interventions for carpal tunnel syndrome. Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 2012;6:CD009899.
- 13. Thomas MA, Felsenthal G, Fast A, Young M. Peripheral Neuropathy. In: DeLisa JA, Gans BM, Walsh NE, editors. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 2005. p. 895-911.
- 14. Gravlee JR, Van Durme DJ. Braces and splints for musculoskeletal conditions. Am Fam Physician 2007;75:342-8.
- 15. McGrath MH. Local steroid therapy in the hand. J Hand Surg Am 1984;9:915-21.
- 16. Lee WP, Strickland JW. Safe carpal tunnel release via a limited palmar incision. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998;101:418-24.
- 17. Zyluk A, Strychar J. A comparison of two limited open techniques for carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Br 2006;31:466-72.
- 18. Klein RD, Kotsis SV, Chung KC. Open carpal tunnel release using a 1-centimeter incision: technique and outcomes for 104 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;111:1616-22.
- 19. Sambandam SN, Priyanka P, Gul A, Ilango B. Critical analysis of outcome measures used in the assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Int Orthop 2008;32:497-504.
- 20. Itsubo T, Uchiyama S, Momose T, Yasutomi T, Imaeda T, Kato H. Electrophysiological responsiveness and quality of life (QuickDASH, CTSI) evaluation of surgically treated carpal tunnel syndrome. J Orthop Sci 2009;14:17-23.
- 21. Schrijver HM, Gerritsen AA, Strijers RL, Uitdehaag BM, Scholten RJ, de Vet HC, et al. Correlating nerve conduction studies and clinical outcome measures on carpal tunnel syndrome: lessons from a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Neurophysiol 2005;22:216-21.
- 22. Chan L, Turner JA, Comstock BA, Levenson LM, Hollingworth W, Heagerty PJ, et al. The relationship between electrodiagnostic findings and patient symptoms and function in carpal tunnel syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:19-24.
- 23. Bulut T, Sener U, Yağdi S, Kazimoğlu C, Sener M. Relationship between clinical and electrophysiological results in surgically treated carpal tunnel syndrome. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi 2011;22:140-4.
- 24. Heybeli N, Kutluhan S, Demirci S, Kerman M, Mumcu EF. Assessment of outcome of carpal tunnel syndrome: a comparison of electrophysiological findings and a self-administered Boston questionnaire. J Hand Surg Br 2002;27:259-64.
| APA | sancmis m, cavit a, cakici i, OZCANLI H, Uysal H (2020). Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?. , 336 - 342. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| Chicago | sancmis mesut,cavit ali,cakici ismail,OZCANLI HALUK,Uysal Hilmi Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?. (2020): 336 - 342. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| MLA | sancmis mesut,cavit ali,cakici ismail,OZCANLI HALUK,Uysal Hilmi Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?. , 2020, ss.336 - 342. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| AMA | sancmis m,cavit a,cakici i,OZCANLI H,Uysal H Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?. . 2020; 336 - 342. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| Vancouver | sancmis m,cavit a,cakici i,OZCANLI H,Uysal H Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?. . 2020; 336 - 342. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| IEEE | sancmis m,cavit a,cakici i,OZCANLI H,Uysal H "Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?." , ss.336 - 342, 2020. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| ISNAD | sancmis, mesut vd. "Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?". (2020), 336-342. https://doi.org/10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| APA | sancmis m, cavit a, cakici i, OZCANLI H, Uysal H (2020). Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 66(3), 336 - 342. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| Chicago | sancmis mesut,cavit ali,cakici ismail,OZCANLI HALUK,Uysal Hilmi Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 66, no.3 (2020): 336 - 342. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| MLA | sancmis mesut,cavit ali,cakici ismail,OZCANLI HALUK,Uysal Hilmi Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol.66, no.3, 2020, ss.336 - 342. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| AMA | sancmis m,cavit a,cakici i,OZCANLI H,Uysal H Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2020; 66(3): 336 - 342. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| Vancouver | sancmis m,cavit a,cakici i,OZCANLI H,Uysal H Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2020; 66(3): 336 - 342. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| IEEE | sancmis m,cavit a,cakici i,OZCANLI H,Uysal H "Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?." Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 66, ss.336 - 342, 2020. 10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
| ISNAD | sancmis, mesut vd. "Is Boston questionnaire an alternative to electromyography for evaluationof the surgical outcome for carpal tunnel syndrome?". Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 66/3 (2020), 336-342. https://doi.org/10.5606/tftrd.2020.3136 |
