Home Medicine Correlation of clinical grading, physical tests and nerve conduction study in carpal tunnel syndrome
Article Publicly Available

Correlation of clinical grading, physical tests and nerve conduction study in carpal tunnel syndrome

  • Sadegh Izadi , Bahareh Kardeh , Seied Saeed Hosini Hooshiar , Mojtaba Neydavoodi and Afshin Borhani-Haghighi EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: May 22, 2018
Download Article (PDF)
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Author Information Explore this Subject
Scandinavian Journal of Pain
From the journal Scandinavian Journal of Pain Volume 18 Issue 3

Abstract

Background and aims

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common debilitating condition. As the reliability of CTS-specific physical tests and its clinical grading remain a matter of debate, we determined the correlations between these assessments with nerve conduction study (NCS).

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, patients with uni or bilateral CTS, which was confirmed in electrodiagnosis, were enrolled. Clinical grading was based on the modified criteria of the Italian CTS Study Group. Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and Boston Questionnaire (BQ) were used. Physical tests [Phalen’s, reverse Phalen’s, Tinel’s and manual carpal compression test (mCCT)] were performed by a single blinded neurologist. A p-value<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

A total of 100 patients (age=47.48±11.44 years; 85% female) with 181 involved hands were studied. The majority of hands (59.7%) were classified as grade 2 of clinical grading. On NCS, hands with mild (64%), moderate (27%) and severe (9%) CTS were identified. Sensory (velocity, latency and amplitude) and motor parameters (latency and amplitude) were significantly correlated with clinical grades (p-value<0.001). The correlation of NPRS (p-value=0.009) and BQ (p-value<0.001) scores with NCS was significant. None of the physical tests were significantly correlated with NCS in terms of result or duration (p-value>0.05).

Conclusions

We found that physical tests are not a reliable screening method for evaluation of CTS severity. However, the BQ and clinical grading can be more valuable due to their significant correlation with NCS.

Implications

Physicians might benefit from employing clinical grading and BQ in practice for better assessment of CTS severity.

Keywords: carpal tunnel syndrome; clinical decision-making; diagnosis; electrodiagnosis; physical examination

1 Introduction

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the compression neuropathy of median nerve at wrist level, where it passes through a narrow osteo-fibrous canal, and remains the most common entrapment neuropathy [1]. The prevalence of this disabling condition is estimated to range from 2.7% in general population [2] to 7.8% among employees who perform hand-intensive activities [3]. A variety of mechanical and medical risk factors contribute to the development of CTS [4], [5]. Accurate and timely diagnosis is the key to achieving the best possible outcome.

Initially, a precise history should provide the clinician with useful information about symptom onset, timing (diurnal vs. nocturnal), localization, aggravating and alleviating factors, predisposing factors, and patient’s routine working activities [6]. Presence of pain, paresthesia, and weakness, particularly within median nerve distribution, should raise suspicion about nerve damage [7]. In a precise physical examination, positive signs should be sought and other concomitant conditions should be ruled out. Commonly used provocative tests in clinical settings are Phalen’s test, reverse Phalen’s test, Tinel’s sign, Durkan’s test or carpal compression and the tourniquet test [8]. Feeling of paresthesia in the median nerve distribution within 1 min implies positive test [9].

As patient history and isolated physical tests have limited diagnostic value [10], [11], [12], paraclinical studies are essential in establishing the definite diagnosis. Nerve conduction study (NCS), ultrasound [13] and magnetic resonance imaging [14] are routinely used. NCS is the gold standard tool for diagnosis and quantification of the severity of CTS [15]. Although ultrasound may not replace NCS as the most sensitive and specific test, it is a feasible first-line confirmatory alternative [16].

The correlation between CTS-specific physical tests and clinical grades of CTS with NCS remains uncertain. Determining the reliability of these simple and low-cost methods helps physicians obtain a more accurate diagnosis and plan optimal treatment. With this aim, we designed the present study.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Patients and setting

This cross-sectional study was conducted on a sample of consecutive patients referring to our outpatient neurology clinic between 2016 and 2017 (affiliated with Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran), who had uni or bilateral CTS confirmed in NCS. Exclusion criteria were proximal involvement of median nerve, compression of ulnar nerve, as well as any underlying neuropathies.

2.2 Nerve conduction study

Neurophysiological evaluation was performed using a commercially available Medelec Oxford Synergy equipment (Old Woking, Surrey, England). Firstly, it was ensured that the skin temperature was above 33 °C. If colder, the hands were warmed up to a suitable temperature. Afterwards, the surface electrodes were utilized for stimulation and recording of the median sensory and motor amplitude, velocity and latency. For sensory nerve conduction, the antidromic technique was applied. The sensory delay was recorded with stimulating electrodes placed at wrist and recording electrodes placed at 3rd finger. Motor conduction studies were carried out using bipolar surface stimulating electrodes.

Based on the findings of NCS, we classified CTS severity as follows: (a) mild: distal sensory latency >3.5 ms with normal motor study; (b) moderate: abnormal sensory study and distal motor latency between 4.4 and 6.5 ms and (c) severe: abnormal sensory study and distal motor latency >6.5 ms with or without decreased motor amplitude [17].

2.3 Data gathering

Demographic characteristics of patients including age, gender and occupation were recorded and related medical profile was assessed. Subsequently, a single neurologist, who was blinded to the results of NCS, carried out subjective and objective investigations for each individual. The neurologist inquired the patients about clinical manifestations; such as, pain, paresthesia, or numbness. Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) was used to measure pain intensity. Using this information and according to the modified criteria of the Italian CTS Study Group [18], [19], [20], involved hands were classified into the following clinical grades: grade 0: asymptomatic, grade 1: nocturnal paresthesia, grade 2: diurnal paresthesia, grade 3: numbness and grade 4: atrophy. Grades 0 and 1 were considered as mild, grades 2 and 3 as moderate and grade 4 as severe CTS. Furthermore, Boston questionnaire (BQ) was completed. This self-administered questionnaire was first developed by Levine et al. [21], and is widely used for CTS [22], [23]. It has two parts for assessment of severity of symptoms (BQ-SS) and functional status (BQ-FS), which consist of eight and 11 questions, respectively. Rezazadeh et al. [24] has verified the validity and reliability of the Persian BQ in Iranian patients with CTS. Also, the Persian format has been shown to be a valid and reliable tool in diabetic patients [25]. Finally, the neurologist performed the following CTS-specific physical tests: Phalen’s test, reverse Phalen’s test, Tinel’s test and manual carpal compression test (mCCT). A resting time from 3 to 5 min was considered in intervals between the tests to allow for subsidence of pain induced by the previous test.

2.4 Ethical considerations

Informed written declaration of consent was obtained from each patient and data confidentiality was guaranteed. Our study was designed according to the Helsinki Declaration and approved by Ethics Committee of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences.

2.5 Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed by IBM SPSS Statistics (Chicago, IL, USA), windows version 16.0. Variables are represented as frequency (percentage) or mean and standard deviation (SD) as applicable. Kruskal-Wallis test and χ2 test were used wherever applicable. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

3 Results

3.1 Demographics

Of a total of 200 hands, diagnosis of CTS was confirmed for 181 hands in NCS; at least one involved hand in each patient. The average age of patients was 47.48±11.44 (Mean±SD) years. The difference between men (50.73±13.12) and women (46.99±11.11) was not statistically significant (p-value=0.23). Female patients constituted 85% of cases. The majority of participants (60%) were housewives, 31 patients were hired in blue-collar jobs and nine had clerical occupations. Top medical comorbidities were hypothyroidism (n=14), diabetes (n=10), concomitant hypothyroidism and diabetes (n=2), and rheumatic disorders (n=6). The other 68 patients reported to be otherwise healthy.

3.2 Clinical grades

Unilateral right-sided CTS was noticed in six patients, while 13 patients had only left hand involvement. The remainder (81%) had bilateral CTS. Regarding CTS-related symptoms, 51 patients stated that they suffered from both pain and paresthesia. Fewer patients were solely affected by paresthesia (n=28) or pain (n=11). Ten patients complained of concurrent paresthesia, pain and muscular weakness. In addition, the clinical grading of CTS in involved hands is demonstrated in Figure 1. Out of 181 hands with confirmed CTS on NCS, 20 hands were asymptomatic and the patients did not have complaints about them. Therefore, these 20 hands belonged to grade 0.

Figure 1: Clinical grades of CTS in involved hands.
Figure 1:

Clinical grades of CTS in involved hands.

3.3 Nerve conduction study

As shown in NCS, the number of hands affected by mild, moderate and severe CTS, was 117 (64.6%), 47 (26%) and 17 (9.4%), respectively. The correlation of NCS severity with the frequency of clinical grades was investigated (Table 1).

Table 1:

The correlation of clinical grades with CTS severity based on NCS.

NCS severity Clinical grading
 Total p-Valuea
0 1 2 3 4
Mild 16 (8.8%) 33 (18.25%) 66 (36.44%) 2 (1.1%) 0 117 (64.6%) <0.001
Moderate 4 (2.2%) 3 (1.65%) 33 (18.26%) 6 (3.34%) 1 (0.55%) 47 (26%)
Severe 0 0 9 (5%) 4 (2.2%) 4 (2.2%) 17 (9.4%)
Total 20 (11.0%) 36 (19.9%) 108 (59.7%) 12 (6.6%) 5 (2.8%) 181 (100.0%)

  1. aχ2 test.

In addition, we evaluated the correlation of clinical grading with specific parameters of NCS (Table 2). Sensory velocity, latency and amplitude, as well as motor distal latency and amplitude were shown to be significantly different among the clinical grades (p-value<0.001).

Table 2:

The correlation of clinical grading with components of NCS.

NCS parameters Clinical grading
 Total p-Value a
0 1 2 3 4
Sensory
 Velocity 44.32±4.03 42.00±4.55 37.81±10.23 26.30±14.12 18.06±16.53 38.06±10.68 <0.001
 Latency 3.73±0.25 3.87±0.315 3.99±1.13 4.39±2.25 3.03±2.77 3.94±1.147 <0.001
  Amplitude 37.13±14.45 40.20±17.45 34.86±17.54 15.28±11.04 12.68±15.05 34.26±17.94 <0.001
Motor
 Distal latency 3.77±0.56 3.96±0.57 4.51±1.29 5.66±1.52 7.45±1.29 4.48±1.31 <0.001
 Amplitude 7.75±2.07 8.92±2.11 7.91±3.01 6.65±1.89 3.43±1.05 7.89±2.79 <0.001

  1. aKruskal-Wallis test.

3.4 Subjective scores

The values of NPRS and BQ were assessed in comparison to the NCS severity; both of which proved to be highly significant (Table 3).

Table 3:

The correlation of NPRS and BQ with CTS severity based on NCS.

Test CTS severity based on NCS
 Total (n=181) p-Valuea
Mild (n=117) Moderate (n=47) Severe (n=17)
NPRS (Mean±SD) 3.56±3.20 3.74±3.26 6.17±3.32 3.85±3.30 0.009
BQ (Mean±SD) 19.91±6.53 20.48±7.10 28.52±9.62 20.87±7.40 <0.001

  1. aKruskal-Wallis test.

3.5 Physical tests

There were no significant correlations between the results of physical tests and the severity of nerve compromise in NCS (Table 4). In cases with positive tests, we examined if the duration until the patient declared to feel the pain was related with CTS severity base on NCS. This item was also non-significant (Table 5).

Table 4:

The correlation of physical tests with CTS severity based on NCS.

Test CTS severity based on NCS
 Total p-Valuea
Mild (n=117) Moderate (n=47) Severe (n=17)
Phalen’s
 + 62 (34.2%) 19 (10.5%) 10 (5.5%) 91 (50.2%) 0.264
 − 55 (30.4%) 28 (15.5%) 7 (3.9%) 90 (49.8%)
Reverse Phalen’s
 + 78 (43.1%) 27 (14.9%) 15 (8.3%) 120 (66.3%) 0.070
 − 39 (21.5%) 20 (11.1%) 2 (1.1%) 61 (33.7%)
Tinel’s
 + 88 (48.7%) 35 (19.3%) 12 (6.6%) 135 (74.6%) 0.919
 − 29 (16%) 12 (6.6%) 5 (2.8%) 46 (25.4%)
mCCT
 + 70 (38.6%) 21 (11.6%) 13 (7.2%) 104 (57.4%) 0.210
 − 47 (26%) 26 (14.4%) 4 (2.2%) 77 (42.6%)

  1. aχ2 test.

Table 5:

The correlation of duration of positive physical tests with CTS severity based on NCS.

Test CTS severity based on NCS
 Total p-Valuea
Mild (n=117) Moderate (n=47) Severe (n=17)
Phalen’s
 No. 62 19 10 91 0.486
 Duration 28.24 28.52 22.30 27.62
Reverse Phalen’s
 No. 78 27 15 120 0.289
 Duration 42.10 53.77 47.33 45.38
mCCT
 No. 70 21 13 104 0.938
 Duration 22.42 21.47 23.15 22.32

  1. aKruskal-Wallis test.

4 Discussion

Similar to a number of previous studies [26], [27], female gender was shown to be a risk factor in our study. The mean age of patients was in the 5th decade of life, close to the peak reported by Bland [28]. The distribution of jobs was in accordance to previous literature and is supported by an Italian study conducted by Mattioli et al., which showed that rates of surgically-treated CTS in women were highest among blue-collar workers, housewives and white-collar workers in descending order. The incidence of CTS in blue-collar men was higher than their white-collar counterparts; however, it was lower as compared to all professional groups in women. The authors pointed out, that domestic chores should be considered a potential risk factor in full-time housewives [29]. Diabetes and hypothyroidism were seen in more than a quarter of our study population. Diabetes is a well-established risk factor for CTS [30], [31], [32]. On the other hand, a recent meta-analysis showed that hypothyroidism is a weak risk factor [33].

Unsurprisingly, NPRS and BQ were highly correlated with CTS severity on NCS. Considering physical tests, we found no associations, neither in regards to the absolute positive or negative results and nor the duration to reproduce symptoms. However, it’s noteworthy that reverse Phalen’s had the lowest p-value. Dale et al. investigated Semmes-Weinstein sensory testing, Tinel’s test, and Phalen’s maneuver on a large population of 1,108 newly-hired workers in diverse industries and concluded that physical examinations have a low yield in screening for CTS [11], which is also supported in another study by Descatha et al. [10].

The relationship between various NCS parameters and clinical grading of CTS was investigated by Srikanteswara et al. Patients were divided into mild, moderate and severe CTS groups based on Mackinnson’s classification. Tinel’s and Phalen’s sign were positive in 36 (72%) and 44 (88%) patients, respectively. Although the rate for Tinel’s was similar to our findings, we only had 51% positive for Phalen’s test. The authors also mentioned that sensory conductions were more sensitive than motor conductions [34]. In contrast, Ansari et al. showed that Phalen’s 30 s was associated with electrodiagnosis [35]. In another study by Ogura et al., prolonged delays were noted in forearm sensory and motor conduction velocity, which were consistent with the increased severity of clinical grade. Yet, there were no significant differences between the severity groups [36].

5 Conclusions

Based on our findings, physical tests cannot be regarded as a valuable screening method to evaluate CTS severity. However, the BQ and clinical grading, which were highly correlated with NCS, can be more reliable.

Acknowledgement

This article was extracted from the thesis conducted by Seied Saeed Hosini Hooshiarand with the support of the dean of medical school and research vice-chancellor of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. The authors appreciate the assistance of Dr. Laleh Khojasteh for proofreading this manuscript.

  1. Authors’ statements

  2. Research funding: Funded by a grant from the Shiraz University of Medical sciences (grant no. 10972).

  3. Conflict of interest: Authors declare no conflict of interest.

  4. Informed consent: Informed written declaration of consent was obtained from each patient and data confidentiality was guaranteed.

  5. Ethical approval: Our study was designed according to the Helsinki Declaration and approved by the Ethics Committee of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences.

References

[1] Aroori S, Spence RA. Carpal tunnel syndrome. Ulster Med J 2008;77:6.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Atroshi I, Gummesson C, Johnsson R, Ornstein E, Ranstam J, Rosén I. Prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in a general population. J Am Med Assoc 1999;282:153–8.10.1001/jama.282.2.153Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[3] Dale AM, Harris-Adamson C, Rempel D, Gerr F, Hegmann K, Silverstein B, Burt S, Garg A, Kapellusch J, Merlino L, Thiese MS, Eisen EA, Evanoff B. Prevalence and incidence of carpal tunnel syndrome in US working populations: pooled analysis of six prospective studies. Scand J Work Environ Health 2013;39:495.10.5271/sjweh.3351Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[4] Geoghegan J, Clark D, Bainbridge L, Smith C, Hubbard R. Risk factors in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Br 2004;29:315–20.10.1016/J.JHSB.2004.02.009Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[5] Maghsoudipour M, Moghimi S, Dehghaan F, Rahimpanah A. Association of occupational and non-occupational risk factors with the prevalence of work related carpal tunnel syndrome. J Occup Rehabil 2008;18:152.10.1007/s10926-008-9125-4Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[6] Alfonso C, Jann S, Massa R, Torreggiani A. Diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of the carpal tunnel syndrome: a review. Neurol Sci 2010;31:243–52.10.1007/s10072-009-0213-9Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[7] Kleopa KA. Carpal tunnel syndrome. Ann Intern Med 2015;163:ITC1.10.7326/AITC201509010Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[8] MacDermid JC, Wessel J. Clinical diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome: a systematic review. J Hand Ther 2004;17:309–19.10.1197/j.jht.2004.02.015Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[9] Ghasemi-rad M, Nosair E, Vegh A, Mohammadi A, Akkad A, Lesha E, Mohammadi MH, Sayed D, Davarian A, Maleki-Miyandoab T, Hasan A. A handy review of carpal tunnel syndrome: From anatomy to diagnosis and treatment. World J Radiol 2014;6:284.10.4329/wjr.v6.i6.284Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[10] Descatha A, Dale A-M, Franzblau A, Coomes J, Evanoff B. Diagnostic strategies using physical examination are minimally useful in defining carpal tunnel syndrome in population-based research studies. Occup Environ Med 2010;67:133–5.10.1136/oem.2009.047431Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[11] Dale AM, Descatha A, Coomes J, Franzblau A, Evanoff B. Physical examination has a low yield in screening for carpal tunnel syndrome. Am J Ind Med 2011;54:1–9.10.1002/ajim.20915Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[12] Amirfeyz R, Clark D, Parsons B, Melotti R, Bhatia R, Leslie I, Bannister G. Clinical tests for carpal tunnel syndrome in contemporary practice. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011;131:471–4.10.1007/s00402-010-1150-zSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[13] Sucher BM, Schreiber AL. Carpal tunnel syndrome diagnosis. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2014;25:229–47.10.1016/j.pmr.2014.01.004Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[14] Cudlip SA, Howe FA, Clifton A, Schwartz MS, Bell BA. Magnetic resonance neurography studies of the median nerve before and after carpal tunnel decompression. J Neurosurg 2002;96:1046–51.10.3171/jns.2002.96.6.1046Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[15] Ibrahim I, Khan W, Goddard N, Smitham P. Carpal tunnel syndrome: a review of the recent literature. Open Orthop J 2012;6:69–76.10.2174/1874325001206010069Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[16] Fowler JR, Gaughan JP, Ilyas AM. The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome: a meta-analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469:1089–94.10.1007/s11999-010-1637-5Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[17] Bland JD. A neurophysiological grading scale for carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 2000;23:1280–3.10.1002/1097-4598(200008)23:8<1280::AID-MUS20>3.0.CO;2-YSearch in Google Scholar

[18] Padua L, LoMonaco M, Gregori B, Valente E, Padua R, Tonali P. Neurophysiological classification and sensitivity in 500 carpal tunnel syndrome hands. Acta Neurol Scand 1997;96:211–7.10.1111/j.1600-0404.1997.tb00271.xSearch in Google Scholar

[19] Padua L, Padua R, LoMonaco M, Romanini E, Tonali P, Group ICS. Italian multicentre study of carpal tunnel syndrome: study design. Ital J Neurol Sci 1998;19:285–9.10.1007/BF00713854Search in Google Scholar

[20] Padua L, Padua R, Monaco ML, Aprile I, Tonali P, Group ICS. Multiperspective assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome a multicenter study. Neurology 1999;53:1654–9.10.1212/WNL.53.8.1654Search in Google Scholar

[21] Levine DW, Simmons BP, Koris MJ, Daltroy LH, Hohl GG, Fossel AH, Katz JN. A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993;75:1585–92.10.2106/00004623-199311000-00002Search in Google Scholar

[22] de Carvalho Leite JC, Jerosch-Herold C, Song F. A systematic review of the psychometric properties of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2006;7:78.10.1186/1471-2474-7-78Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[23] 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 2004;29:159–64.10.1016/j.jhsb.2003.10.010Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[24] Rezazadeh A, Bakhtiary AH, Samaei A, Moghimi J. Validity and reliability of the Persian Boston questionnaire in Iranian patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. Koomesh 2014:138–45.Search in Google Scholar

[25] Foroozanfar Z, Ebrahimi H, Khanjani N. Validity and reliability of the Persian Boston Questionnaire in diabetic patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. J Neyshabur Univ Med Sci 2015;2:50–6.Search in Google Scholar

[26] Becker J, Nora DB, Gomes I, Stringari FF, Seitensus R, Panosso JS, Ehlers JC. An evaluation of gender, obesity, age and diabetes mellitus as risk factors for carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Neurophysiol 2002;113:1429–34.10.1016/S1388-2457(02)00201-8Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[27] McDiarmid M, Oliver M, Ruser J, Gucer P. Male and female rate differences in carpal tunnel syndrome injuries: personal attributes or job tasks? Environ Res 2000;83:23–32.10.1006/enrs.2000.4042Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[28] Bland JD. The relationship of obesity, age, and carpal tunnel syndrome: more complex than was thought? Muscle Nerve 2005;32:527–32.10.1002/mus.20408Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[29] Mattioli S, Baldasseroni A, Curti S, Cooke RM, Mandes A, Zanardi F, Farioli A, Buiatti E, Campo G, Violante FS. Incidence rates of surgically treated idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome in blue-and white-collar workers and housewives in Tuscany, Italy. Occup Environ Med 2009;66:299–304.10.1136/oem.2008.040212Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[30] Gulliford MC, Latinovic R, Charlton J, Hughes RA. Increased incidence of carpal tunnel syndrome up to 10 years before diagnosis of diabetes. Diabetes Care 2006;29:1929–30.10.2337/dc06-0939Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[31] Karpitskaya Y, Novak CB, Mackinnon SE. Prevalence of smoking, obesity, diabetes mellitus, and thyroid disease in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. Ann Plast Surg 2002;48:269–73.10.1097/00000637-200203000-00007Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[32] Singh R, Gamble G, Cundy T. Lifetime risk of symptomatic carpal tunnel syndrome in Type 1 diabetes. Diabetic Med 2005;22:625–30.10.1111/j.1464-5491.2005.01487.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[33] Shiri R. Hypothyroidism and carpal tunnel syndrome: a meta-analysis. Muscle Nerve 2014;50:879–83.10.1002/mus.24453Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[34] Srikanteswara PK, Cheluvaiah JD, Agadi JB, Nagaraj K. The relationship between nerve conduction study and clinical grading of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10:OC13–8.10.7860/JCDR/2016/20607.8097Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[35] Ansari NN, Adelmanesh F, Naghdi S, Mousavi S. The relationship between symptoms, clinical tests and nerve conduction study findings in carpal tunnel syndrome. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 2009;49:53.Search in Google Scholar

[36] Ogura T, Akiyo N, Kubo T, Kira Y, Aramaki S, Nakanishi F. The relationship between nerve conduction study and clinical grading of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Orthop Surg Res 2003;11:190–3.10.1177/230949900301100215Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2017-11-13
Revised: 2018-03-09
Accepted: 2018-03-14
Published Online: 2018-05-22
Published in Print: 2018-07-26

©2018 Scandinavian Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston. All rights reserved

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial comment
  3. Diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome
  4. Body image concerns and distortions in people with persistent pain
  5. The prevalence of recurrent pain in childhood is high and increases with age
  6. Friends in pain: pain tolerance in a social network
  7. Clinical pain research
  8. Correlation of clinical grading, physical tests and nerve conduction study in carpal tunnel syndrome
  9. Spectroscopic differences in posterior insula in patients with chronic temporomandibular pain
  10. Deconstructing chronicity of musculoskeletal pain: intensity-duration relations, minimal dimensions and clusters of chronicity
  11. “When I feel the worst pain, I look like shit” – body image concerns in persistent pain
  12. The prevalence of neck-shoulder pain, back pain and psychological symptoms in association with daytime sleepiness – a prospective follow-up study of school children aged 10 to 15
  13. The neglected role of distress in pain management: qualitative research on a gastrointestinal ward
  14. Pain mapping of the anterior knee: injured athletes know best
  15. The role of pain in chronic pain patients’ perception of health-related quality of life: a cross-sectional SQRP study of 40,000 patients
  16. The DoloTest® in a specialized headache center among patients receiving psychological treatment. A pilot study
  17. Observational study
  18. Chronic pelvic pain – pain catastrophizing, pelvic pain and quality of life
  19. Survey of chronic pain in Chile – prevalence and treatment, impact on mood, daily activities and quality of life
  20. Patients’ pre-operative general and specific outcome expectations predict postoperative pain and function after total knee and total hip arthroplasties
  21. The peer effect on pain tolerance
  22. Original experimental
  23. The effects of propranolol on heart rate variability and quantitative, mechanistic, pain profiling: a randomized placebo-controlled crossover study
  24. Idiographic measurement of depressive thinking: development and preliminary validation of the Sentence Completion Test for Chronic Pain (SCP)
  25. Adding steroids to lidocaine in a therapeutic injection regimen for patients with abdominal pain due to anterior cutaneous nerve entrapment syndrome (ACNES): a single blinded randomized clinical trial
  26. The influence of isometric exercise on endogenous pain modulation: comparing exercise-induced hypoalgesia and offset analgesia in young, active adults
  27. Do pain-associated contexts increase pain sensitivity? An investigation using virtual reality
  28. Differences in Swedish and Australian medical student attitudes and beliefs about chronic pain, its management, and the way it is taught
  29. An experimental investigation of the relationships among race, prayer, and pain
  30. Educational case report
  31. Wireless peripheral nerve stimulation for complex regional pain syndrome type I of the upper extremity: a case illustration introducing a novel technology
https://doi.org/10.1515/sjpain-2017-0164
Keywords for this article
carpal tunnel syndrome; clinical decision-making; diagnosis; electrodiagnosis; physical examination

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial comment
  3. Diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome
  4. Body image concerns and distortions in people with persistent pain
  5. The prevalence of recurrent pain in childhood is high and increases with age
  6. Friends in pain: pain tolerance in a social network
  7. Clinical pain research
  8. Correlation of clinical grading, physical tests and nerve conduction study in carpal tunnel syndrome
  9. Spectroscopic differences in posterior insula in patients with chronic temporomandibular pain
  10. Deconstructing chronicity of musculoskeletal pain: intensity-duration relations, minimal dimensions and clusters of chronicity
  11. “When I feel the worst pain, I look like shit” – body image concerns in persistent pain
  12. The prevalence of neck-shoulder pain, back pain and psychological symptoms in association with daytime sleepiness – a prospective follow-up study of school children aged 10 to 15
  13. The neglected role of distress in pain management: qualitative research on a gastrointestinal ward
  14. Pain mapping of the anterior knee: injured athletes know best
  15. The role of pain in chronic pain patients’ perception of health-related quality of life: a cross-sectional SQRP study of 40,000 patients
  16. The DoloTest® in a specialized headache center among patients receiving psychological treatment. A pilot study
  17. Observational study
  18. Chronic pelvic pain – pain catastrophizing, pelvic pain and quality of life
  19. Survey of chronic pain in Chile – prevalence and treatment, impact on mood, daily activities and quality of life
  20. Patients’ pre-operative general and specific outcome expectations predict postoperative pain and function after total knee and total hip arthroplasties
  21. The peer effect on pain tolerance
  22. Original experimental
  23. The effects of propranolol on heart rate variability and quantitative, mechanistic, pain profiling: a randomized placebo-controlled crossover study
  24. Idiographic measurement of depressive thinking: development and preliminary validation of the Sentence Completion Test for Chronic Pain (SCP)
  25. Adding steroids to lidocaine in a therapeutic injection regimen for patients with abdominal pain due to anterior cutaneous nerve entrapment syndrome (ACNES): a single blinded randomized clinical trial
  26. The influence of isometric exercise on endogenous pain modulation: comparing exercise-induced hypoalgesia and offset analgesia in young, active adults
  27. Do pain-associated contexts increase pain sensitivity? An investigation using virtual reality
  28. Differences in Swedish and Australian medical student attitudes and beliefs about chronic pain, its management, and the way it is taught
  29. An experimental investigation of the relationships among race, prayer, and pain
  30. Educational case report
  31. Wireless peripheral nerve stimulation for complex regional pain syndrome type I of the upper extremity: a case illustration introducing a novel technology
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 5.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/sjpain-2017-0164/html
Scroll to top button