The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2008;90:2587-2593.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.G.01362
© 2008 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow [Supplementary Material]
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: View responses
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Graham, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Graham, B.
Related Collections
Right arrow Hand/Wrist
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

The Value Added by Electrodiagnostic Testing in the Diagnosis of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Brent Graham, MD1

1 Hand Program, Toronto Western Hospital, 399 Bathurst Street, East Wing 2-425, Toronto, ON M5T 2S8, Canada. E-mail address: Brent.Graham{at}uhn.on.ca

Investigation performed at the University Health Network, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Disclosure: In support of his research for or preparation of this work, the author received, in any one year, outside funding or grants in excess of $10,000 from the Research Advisory Council of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board. Neither he nor a member of his immediate family received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the author, or a member of his immediate family, is affiliated or associated.

A commentary is available with the electronic versions of this article, on our web site (www.jbjs.org) and on our quarterly CD-ROM/DVD (call our subscription department, at 781-449-9780, to order the CD-ROM or DVD).


Background: There is no clear-cut consensus on the best diagnostic criteria for carpal tunnel syndrome. The objective of this study was to compare the probability of carpal tunnel syndrome being present following electrodiagnostic testing with the probability of it being present after the diagnosis was established on the basis of a clinical evaluation alone.

Methods: The study sample included patients with any peripheral nerve diagnosis who had been referred to the electrodiagnostic laboratory of an academic health-care center. The probability of carpal tunnel syndrome before electrodiagnostic testing (pretest probability) was estimated with use of the CTS-6, a validated clinical diagnostic aid that is used to estimate the probability of carpal tunnel syndrome on the basis of the presence or absence of six clinical findings recorded as part of the history or noted on physical examination. All patients then underwent a standard electrodiagnostic assessment of the median nerve by a neurologist blinded to the result of the CTS-6 evaluation. Sensory nerve conduction velocity was used to classify the result of the electrodiagnostic testing as either positive or negative for carpal tunnel syndrome with use of two different criteria (one stringent and one lax) derived from the literature. The main outcome measure was the difference between the pretest and posttest probabilities of carpal tunnel syndrome.

Results: One hundred and forty-three patients were studied. The pretest probability of carpal tunnel syndrome ranged between 0.10 and 0.99 (mean [and standard deviation], 0.81 ± 0.22). Seventy-three percent of the patients had a pretest probability of at least 0.80. The average change in probability for these patients was –0.02 when the stringent electrodiagnostic criterion was used and –0.06 when the lax criterion was used. With either electrodiagnostic criterion, the majority of the large changes in probability were for patients for whom the pretest probability was ≤0.50. The probability of carpal tunnel syndrome was lowered after the electrodiagnostic testing in most of these cases.

Conclusions: For the majority of patients who are considered to have carpal tunnel syndrome on the basis of their history and physical examination alone, electrodiagnostic tests do not change the probability of diagnosing this condition to an extent that is clinically relevant.

Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level I. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


Letters to the Editor:

Read all Letters to the Editor

Is carpal tunnel still a syndrome?
David Ring, MD
JBJS Online, 4 Dec 2008 [Full text]
Autonomic Dysfunction in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Venkat R. Mekala, et al.
JBJS Online, 5 Feb 2009 [Full text]
Dr. Graham responds to Dr. Ring
Brent A. Graham, MD, MSc, FRCSC
JBJS Online, 22 Dec 2008 [Full text]
Value of A History Based Questionaire In The Diagnosis of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Vijay Kamath, et al.
JBJS Online, 24 Mar 2009 [Full text]
Dr. Graham responds to Mr. Kamath and Mr. Stothard
Brent Graham, MD
JBJS Online, 24 Mar 2009 [Full text]