Schulze DG, Nordby KC, Cvancarova Småstuen M, Clemm T, Grotle M, Zwart JA, Nilsen KB. Impact of technical variations on the ring-finger test for carpal tunnel syndrome.
Clin Neurophysiol Pract 2019;
5:23-29. [PMID:
31909307 PMCID:
PMC6940656 DOI:
10.1016/j.cnp.2019.11.005]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2019] [Revised: 11/19/2019] [Accepted: 11/23/2019] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
The median and ulnar nerves can be recorded consecutively or simultaneously to diagnose carpal tunnel syndrome.
Simultaneous and consecutive recording of the median and ulnar nerves sensory latency have a poor agreement.
Technical variations can have diagnostic consequences.
Objective
To assess if recording the sensory latencies of the median and ulnar nerves one-by-one (consecutive) or at the same time (simultaneous) in the ring-finger test for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) will show equivalent results or if it will lead to a different clinical classification of patients.
Methods
We assessed the limits of agreement between the simultaneous and the consecutive method based on the median- ulnar sensory latency difference derived by both methods in 80 subjects and compared the number of minimal CTS cases identified by the two methods.
Results
Limits of agreement ranged from −0.23 to 0.29 ms. A significantly higher proportion of subjects with minimal CTS (only detectable by using the comparison test) was found using the simultaneous method (n = 8 and 2, respectively; p = 0.03).
Conclusion
The two methods have a poor to moderate agreement as indicated by the range of the limits of agreement (0.5 ms).
Significance
Even small methodological changes to the ring-finger test can lead to results with different clinical meaning in the same individual and one should be aware of which method was used when interpreting results.
Collapse