Determinants of return to work after carpal tunnel release

Association Between Pain Coping and Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression, and Work Absenteeism in People With Upper Limb Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prospective association of pain coping strategies and symptoms of anxiety and depression with work absenteeism in people with upper limb musculoskeletal disorders.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases was conducted from inception to September 23, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Prospective observational studies of adults with upper limb musculoskeletal disorders were included. Included studies had to provide data on the association of pain coping strategies (catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, self-efficacy or fear avoidance) or symptoms of anxiety and depression with work absenteeism.

DATA EXTRACTION

Study selection, data extraction, and assessment of methodological quality (Newcastle Ottawa Scale) were performed by 2 independent authors. Random-effects models were used for quantitative synthesis.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eighteen studies (n=12,393 participants) were included. Most studies (77.8%) reported at least 1 significant association between 1 or more exposure factors (pain coping strategies or symptoms of anxiety and depression) and work absenteeism. Meta-analyses showed a statistically significant correlation between the exposure factors of catastrophizing (r=0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.15 to 0.40; P<.0001) and symptoms of anxiety and depression (r=0.23, 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.34; P=.0003) with work absenteeism. The correlation between self-efficacy and work absenteeism was non-significant (r=0.24, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.47; P=.0747).

CONCLUSIONS

Rehabilitation teams should consider assessing catastrophizing and symptoms of anxiety and depression to identify patients at risk for work absenteeism. Addressing these variables may also be considered in return-to-work programs for individuals with upper limb disorders.

Factors Associated with the Return to Work after Carpal Tunnel Release Surgery: A Cross-Sectional Study of the Worker Population

Background: There is controversy regarding the factors influencing the duration of sickness absence and return to work (RTW) after surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). This study aimed to determine factors related to RTW in these patients. Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was performed on all patients with CTS who underwent surgery in a main orthopaedic centre from December 2020 to April 2021. Patients were followed for 90 days after surgery for the RTW. The patients were classified into two groups based on the time of RTW, early (<21 days) and late (>21 days). These two groups were compared in terms of occupational, individual and disease-related factors and the type of surgery. Results: The mean time to RTW in patients was 23.2 ± 7.1 days, with a range of 7-60 days. There was a statistically significant relationship between early RTW and gender (female) (p = 0.005 OR = 6.5), non-manual work (p = 0.002 OR = 1.2), the total score of the Boston carpal tunnel questionnaire before surgery and job satisfaction (p = 0.04). The mean time to RTW in patients who underwent open surgery was less than in endoscopic surgery (22.89 ± 6.29 vs. 24.58 ± 4.7), but this difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Based on the findings of our study, the type of surgery does not affect the RTW of patients with CTS. Considering the effect of job type and job satisfaction on RTW, it is recommended to pay attention to the type of occupation in addition to the type of surgery so that this workforce can RTW with good performance. Level of Evidence: Level IV (Therapeutic).

Incidence of Peripheral Nerve Decompression Surgery During Pregnancy and the First Year After Delivery in Finland From 1999 to 2017: A Retrospective Register-Based Cohort Study

PURPOSE

We aimed to report the incidence of peripheral nerve decompression surgery during pregnancy and 12 months after delivery in Finland from 1999 to 2017.

METHODS

Using nationwide data from the Finnish Care Register for Health Care and the Finnish Medical Birth Register, all women of potentially childbearing age (15-49 years) who underwent peripheral nerve decompression surgery or had a pregnancy ending in delivery from January 1, 1999, to December 31, 2017, were included. Incidence rates and incidence rate ratios for operations were calculated for both childbearing women and the age-adjusted general female population.

RESULTS

In total, 308 women underwent carpal tunnel release (CTR) during pregnancy, and an additional 675 women underwent CTR within 12 months after delivery. The incidence of CTR during pregnancy was 38 per 100,000 person-years, with an incidence rate ratio of 0.5 (95% CI, 0.4-0.6), when compared with that in the general population. Women who were active smokers before becoming pregnant were more likely to undergo CTR during pregnancy (odds ratio, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.8-3.0). The highest rates of CTR were observed during the first trimester. The incidence of CTR in the first postpartum year increased steadily during the first 4 months to 79 per 100,000 person-years. During the latter 8 months, incidences were similar to those in the general population (incidence rate ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.9-1.2). Women who smoked were more likely to undergo CTR during the first postpartum year (odds ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3-1.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Carpal tunnel release is performed more rarely during pregnancy than in the age-matched general population. Postpartum incidences increased toward the end of the first year, reaching those observed in the general population after the first 4 months. Smoking before pregnancy is associated with increased incidences of CTR both during pregnancy and the first year after delivery.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic II.

Surgeons' Recommendations for Return to Work After Carpal Tunnel Release

BACKGROUND

Recommendations and expectations regarding return to work (RTW) after carpal tunnel release (CTR) are often inconsistent. The study aim was to describe preferences of American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) members for perioperative management of patients following CTR, emphasizing surgeon preference regarding RTW.

METHODS

A survey was sent to all ASSH members with active e-mail addresses. The primary outcome was the recommended time frame for patients to RTW full duty. Secondarily, associated factors with RTW were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 4109 e-mail surveys were sent with 632 responses (15%). The highest proportion of respondents perform >100 CTRs per year (43.2%), have been practicing for >20 years (38.1%), and perform CTR using standard, open approach at outpatient surgery centers. The primary surgeon made recommendations about RTW in 99.5% of cases. For desk-based duties, the median recommended RTW time was 3 days; for duties requiring repetitive, light lifting of <10 lbs, the median recommended RTW time was 10 days; and for heavy manual duties, the median recommended RTW time was 30 days after CTR, according to the respondents. The 3 factors considered most influential for RTW were type of work, employer support, and financial considerations.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates consistency among ASSH members in the perioperative management of CTR patients. The most important factors affecting RTW were type of work performed, employer support, and financial considerations. This study provides a meaningful foundation to manage expectations and guide patients, medical providers, and employers on the amount of time likely to be missed from work after CTR.

Nonpalmar Endoscopic versus Open Trigger Finger Release: Results from a Prospective Trial

The most common complaint after open surgical release for trigger finger is of pain and scarring at the surgical site. We hypothesized that use of a new nonpalmar endoscopic approach for release of the A1 pulley through an incision at the proximal digital crease would result in decreased scarring and faster recovery compared to those treated with standard open release.

Methods

Patients with trigger finger were prospectively enrolled and treated with a nonpalmar endoscopic versus open surgical technique. Outcome measures included scar assessment based on the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) administered 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months postoperatively, time before return to work, occupational therapy visits, and overall satisfaction. Additional outcomes included pain medication use, operative time, and complication and recurrence rates.

Results

POSAS scores were better in the endoscopic treatment group than in the open group at all time points with a statistically significant difference seen at 1 week and 1 month postoperatively. The endoscopic group returned to work sooner, required fewer occupational therapy visits, and had better overall satisfaction compared to the open group, but the differences were not statistically significant. Complication and recurrence rates did not differ significantly between groups.

Conclusions

Patients treated for trigger finger with a nonpalmar endoscopic release through an incision at the proximal digital crease demonstrate significantly better scarring in the early postoperative period compared to patients treated with the open surgical approach. Treatment for trigger finger with this technique is as effective as the standard open technique.

What are the Predictors of Return to Work for People With Elbow, Wrist, and Hand Conditions? A Systematic Review

Purpose Conditions affecting the elbow, forearm, wrist, and hand can cause debilitating pain and loss of function in the working population. While there is knowledge about intervention options for this region of the body, there is limited research on systematically identifying the predictors of return to work in this population. Methods A systematic literature review identified all English-language studies that assess predictors of return to work for people with elbow, wrist, and hand conditions from 2009 to 2021 using PRISMA guidelines. Studies that examined exclusively shoulder injuries, randomized control trials, non-human studies, case studies, case reports, case series, and narrative reviews were excluded. Participants of included studies must have a health-related condition of the fingers, wrist, forearm, and elbow that is preventing work participation and must be 16 years and older. Included studies must be observational, longitudinal, and include a return to work outcome. Results Nineteen out of 170 studies were included. Average time away from work varied between seven to 304 days. Positive predictors of early return to work include: demographics, type of injury, type of treatment, work status, physical factors, psychological factors, use of self-reported outcome measures, and self-reported pain. Conclusion Five clinician recommendations were developed based on the findings of our systematic review. Clinicians should consider the type of work, use of outcome measures, psychological factors, hospitalization, and salary. These recommendations are intended to influence the behavior of clinicians when determining prognosis for return to work of people with elbow, wrist, and hand conditions.

Evaluation of Factors Affecting Return to Work Following Carpal Tunnel Release: A Statewide Cohort Study of Workers' Compensation Subjects

PURPOSE

Most randomized trials comparing open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) to endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) are not specific to a working population and focus mainly on how surgical technique has an impact on outcomes. This study's primary goal was to evaluate factors affecting days out of work (DOOW) following carpal tunnel release (CTR) in a working population and to evaluate for differences in medical costs, indemnity payments, disability ratings, and opioid use between OCTR and ECTR with the intent of determining whether one or the other surgical method was a determining factor.

METHODS

Using the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation claims database, individuals were identified who underwent unilateral isolated CTR between 1993 and 2018. We excluded those who were on total disability, who underwent additional surgery within 6 months of their index CTR, including contralateral or revision CTR, and those not working during the same month as their index CTR. Outcomes were evaluated at 6 months after surgery. Multivariable linear regression was performed to evaluate covariates associated with DOOW.

RESULTS

Of the 4596 included participants, 569 (12.4%) and 4027 (87.6%) underwent ECTR and OCTR, respectively. Mean DOOW were 58.4 for participants undergoing OCTR and 56.6 for those undergoing ECTR. Carpal tunnel release technique was not predictive of DOOW. Net medical costs were 20.7% higher for those undergoing ECTR. Multivariable linear regression demonstrated the following significant predictors of higher DOOW: preoperative opioid use, legal representation, labor-intensive occupation, increasing lag time from injury to filing of a worker's compensation claim, and female sex. Being married, higher income community, and working in the public sector were associated with fewer DOOW.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large statewide worker's compensation population, demographic, occupational, psychosocial, and litigatory factors have a significant impact on DOOW following CTR, whereas differences in surgical technique between ECTR and OCTR did not.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic III.

Work transition after hand injury: A scoping review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic scoping review.

INTRODUCTION

Many factors are potentially associated with successful work-related transitions following hand injury. There is no current, comprehensive review of the literature to guide clinical practice.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To comprehensively identify the current body of research evidence supporting return to work (RTW) after hand injury and identify gaps.

METHODS

A systematic search identified relevant, peer-reviewed, full text, English language primary qualitative or quantitative literature published since 2006. All authors independently determined whether studies should be included, assigned them to a hierarchy of evidence and extracted data. Decisions were defended and disagreements resolved in team meetings. Literature was summarized into key themes using common intent and constructs.

RESULTS

Of 259 potentially-relevant articles, 38 were relevant. Study designs included prospective observational, cross-sectional, and retrospective (n=9 each), mixed methods (n=3), qualitative (n=4), and opinion pieces (n=4). There were no experimental studies. The most commonly-reported key themes were prognostic factors for RTW (25 papers) and assessment tools (18 papers). Remaining themes of impact of injury on the individual, patient perspectives, other stakeholder perspectives, healthcare provider education, and treatment were reported in fewer than 10 papers each. There was little commonality in how research was conducted or reported. Gaps included lack of information on effective interventions, which prognostic factors should be routinely measured, and which assessment and outcome items to routinely use in practice.

CONCLUSION

Despite the impact of hand injury on capacity to RTW, there is limited evidence to inform successful work-related transitions.

Return to work following ultrasound guided thread carpal tunnel release versus open carpal tunnel release: a comparative study

A retrospective review of hospital employees at a single employer institution who underwent ultrasound guided thread carpal tunnel release (TCTR) or open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) between January 2018 and August 2020 was performed to ascertain differences in return-to-work status. Patient age, sex, occupation, handedness, severity of carpal tunnel syndrome, prior treatments and surgical outcomes were reviewed. A total of 18 patients underwent TCTR and 17 patients underwent OCTR. The TCTR group averaged 12 days to return to work without restrictions, as opposed to 33 days for the OCTR group. Resolution of symptoms was afforded in all patients without any complications regardless of surgical technique. While both TCTR and OCTR were effective, our data indicates that TCTR resulted in a shorter return to work.Level of evidence: III.

Effects of Cognitive and Mental Health Factors on the Outcomes Following Carpal Tunnel Release: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of the cognitive and mental health factors on the outcomes after carpal tunnel release (CTR).

DATA SOURCES

Embase, PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to August 14, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials and observational studies of patients with CTR were included. The included studies aimed to determine the effect of the cognitive (catastrophic thinking, kinesiophobia, self-efficacy) or mental health factors (symptoms of anxiety and depression) on the outcomes at least 3 months post CTR.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. Data were extracted using a standardized protocol and reporting forms. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies risk-of-bias tool. Random-effects models were used for meta-analysis.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 15 studies involving 2599 patients were included in this systematic review. The majority of studies indicate a significant association between the cognitive or mental health factors and outcomes after CTR. Quantitative analysis showed a moderate association of symptoms of depression on symptom severity (n=531; r=0.347; 95% CI, 0.205-0.475; P≤.0001), function (n=386; r=0.307; 95% CI, 0.132-0.464; P=.0008), and pain (n=344; r=0.431; 95% CI, 0.286-0.558; P≤.0001). In general, the risk of bias in the included studies was low.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that symptoms of depression have a moderate association with symptom severity, function, and pain after CTR. Symptoms of anxiety, catastrophic thinking, and self-efficacy are also important indicators of poor postsurgery outcomes. Physicians, physical therapists, and occupational therapists should consider evaluating these variables in patients undergoing CTR.

Early Outcomes of Endoscopic Versus Open Carpal Tunnel Release

PURPOSE

To compare the short-term outcomes of endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR), including patient-reported outcomes, pain and satisfaction scores, return to work, and postoperative prescription pain medication use.

METHODS

We included all patients over 18 years of age undergoing carpal tunnel release at a single hand center between January 2018 and December 2019. The carpal tunnel release method was driven by variations in surgeon practice. Data from patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) questionnaires and brief Michigan hand outcomes questionnaires and data on patient-reported pain levels, satisfaction with care, return to work, and postoperative prescription pain medication use were collected at preoperative visits and the first follow-up visit between postoperative days 7 and 14.

RESULTS

We included 678 (586 ECTR and 92 OCTR) patients. The median age was 58 years, and 75% of the patients were women. At early follow up, patients who underwent OCTR reported significantly lower postoperative PROMIS upper-extremity scores than those who underwent ECTR (median, 32 vs 36 points, respectively) but similar postoperative PROMIS pain interference, global physical health, global mental health, and brief Michigan hand outcomes questionnaire scores. The postoperative pain and satisfaction scores were similar between the 2 groups. In multivariable models, patients who underwent OCTR had 62% lower odds of returning to work and 30% greater odds of remaining on a postoperative pain prescription at the first follow-up visit.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found no evidence suggesting the definitive superiority of 1 surgical technique with regard to clinical outcomes in the early postoperative period. However, OCTR was associated with lower postoperative PROMIS upper-extremity scores of unclear clinical significance, higher odds of remaining on pain medication, and lower odds of returning to work by the first postoperative visit. Endoscopic carpal tunnel release may be preferred in patients who need to return to work within the first 2 weeks after the procedure.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

The Influence of Illness Perception and Mental Health on Return to Work After Carpal Tunnel Release Surgery

PURPOSE

Although multiple factors influencing return to work after a carpal tunnel release (CTR) have been identified, little is known about the influence of psychological patient factors on return to work. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the psychological factors that play a role in the return to work after a CTR surgery.

METHODS

Patients who planned to undergo a CTR were asked to fill out the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire and the Patient Health Questionnaire before surgery to measure their illness perceptions and mental health status, respectively. Return to work was defined as the time until returning to work for 50% of normal hours and was measured using a questionnaire at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. To identify associations between nonpsychological and psychological patient factors and the return to work after CTR surgery, a Cox proportional hazards model was constructed.

RESULTS

In total, 615 patients were included in our study. Six months after surgery, 91% of the patients returned to work. For the psychological patient factors, we found that increases of 1 point on the items of worrying about carpal tunnel syndrome and having faith preoperatively in a beneficial effect of the CTR surgery were associated with hazard ratios of 0.92 (95% confidence interval, 0.88-0.96) and 1.10 (95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.19), respectively, for returning to work in the first 6 months after surgery. An increase of 1 point on the depression subscale of the Patient Health Questionnaire was associated with a hazard ratio of 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.99) for returning to work in the first 6 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that multiple psychological patient factors are associated with return to work after a CTR surgery. Addressing these psychological factors before surgery might be a low-cost intervention to improve return to work after the CTR surgery.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic II.

Modified Carpal Tunnel Release: A New Approach to Minimizing Pillar Pain

INTRODUCTION

Pillar pain is a frequent postoperative complication of carpal tunnel release (CTR). The precise definition of pillar pain is lacking, but most authors describe it as diffuse aching pain and tenderness in the thenar and hypothenar area. The etiology of pillar pain is unclear. However, the most prevalent theory is the neurogenic theory, which attributes the pain to the damage of small nerve branches of palmar cutaneous branches of median nerve after surgical incision, with resulting entrapment of the nerves in the scar tissue at the incision site. We postulated that a main source of pillar pain is sensory neuromas along the incision site.In this article, we describe a simple modification of the standard CTR technique with intent to decrease neuroma formation and thus minimizing pillar pain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study comparing the incidence and duration of pillar pain between patients who underwent standard CTR (SCTR, n = 53) versus the minimizing pillar pain CTR technique (n = 55). Based on duration of pillar pain, the groups were placed into 3 subgroups (<3, 3-6, and >6 months). Presence and duration of pillar pain in each group were recorded along with return to work (RTW), complications, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

The SCTR group had a total of 17 patients with pillar pain (32.1%), 5 of which resolved within 3 months, 7 within 3 to 6 months, and 5 in more than 6 months. The group that underwent the minimizing pillar pain technique had a total of 4 patients with pillar pain (7.2%). Three resolved within 3 months, 1 resolved within 3 to 6 months, and there were no patients with pillar pain lasting more than 6 months. Average RTW time for minimization of pillar pain CTR (MPPCTR) was 34.9 days. Average RTW time for SCTR was 54.8 days. Satisfaction was higher among patients who underwent surgery with MPPCTR.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on these results, we concluded that MPPCTR compared with SCTR had equal complication rate, however, significantly lower incidence and duration of pillar pain, higher rate of satisfaction, and earlier RTW.

Health-care providers' perspectives on factors influencing return-to-work after surgery for nontraumatic conditions of the upper extremity

STUDY DESIGN

This study is a descriptive survey.

INTRODUCTION

Health care providers (HCPs) are key stakeholders who facilitate workers' return to work (RTW) following upper extremity surgery. Hand therapists play a major role in this process, yet we do not know if and/or how their perspectives differ from other HCPs.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This study examined HCPs' opinion on factors that influence RTW after surgery for nontraumatic upper extremity conditions and whether HCPs from different disciplines differed in their opinion.

METHODS

HCPs (occupational therapists, physiotherapists, hand therapists, exercise physiologists, psychologists, surgeons, and general practitioners) completed a survey rating 50 factors on a worker's ability to RTW. Each factor was scored using a 5-point Likert scale from "not" to "extremely" influential, which was later dichotomised. Agreement was indicated at 75%. The level of disagreement between disciplines was examined.

RESULTS

Respondents (n = 787) identified 20 factors being influential on RTW. They are (in order from highest to lowest) poor pain coping (the highest, >85% of respondents), postoperative psychological state, RTW self-efficacy, employer/supervisor's support, employer's unwillingness for job modification, recovery expectations, job satisfaction, suitable duties availability, whether the job can be modified, and mood disorder diagnosis. There was agreement that two factors do not influence RTW, gender, and preemployment medical assessment. There was disagreement (P < .05) between HCP disciplines on six factors (obesity, comorbidities, doctors' RTW recommendation, diagnosis, fitness, income). There were no consistent patterns with respect to which professions disagreed across all six factors. Hand therapists differed from the other disciplines for three of the factors including diagnosis, comorbidities, and doctor's recommendation for RTW.

DISCUSSION

The factors that stakeholders agreed as having the greatest influence were mainly related to the worker (pain and psychological factors) and the workplace and are amenable to RTW interventions.

CONCLUSION

Interventions facilitating RTW and future research should consider the factors identified by HCPs in this study.

Cost-Effectiveness of Open Versus Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release

BACKGROUND

Carpal tunnel syndrome is the most common upper-extremity nerve compression syndrome. Over 500,000 carpal tunnel release (CTR) procedures are performed in the U.S. yearly. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of endoscopic CTR (ECTR) versus open CTR (OCTR) using data from published meta-analyses comparing outcomes for ECTR and OCTR.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model to examine the cost-effectiveness of OCTR versus ECTR for patients undergoing unilateral CTR in an office setting under local anesthesia and in an operating-room (OR) setting under monitored anesthesia care. The main outcomes were costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We modeled societal (modeled with a 50-year-old patient) and Medicare payer (modeled with a 65-year-old patient) perspectives, adopting a lifetime time horizon. We performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs).

RESULTS

ECTR resulted in 0.00141 additional QALY compared with OCTR. From a societal perspective, assuming 8.21 fewer days of work missed after ECTR than after OCTR, ECTR cost less across all procedure settings. The results are sensitive to the number of days of work missed following surgery. From a payer perspective, ECTR in the OR (ECTROR) cost $1,872 more than OCTR in the office (OCTRoffice), for an ICER of approximately $1,332,000/QALY. The ECTROR cost $654 more than the OCTROR, for an ICER of $464,000/QALY. The ECTRoffice cost $107 more than the OCTRoffice, for an ICER of $76,000/QALY. From a payer perspective, for a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY, OCTRoffice was preferred over ECTROR in 77% of the PSA iterations. From a societal perspective, ECTROR was preferred over OCTRoffice in 61% of the PSA iterations.

CONCLUSIONS

From a societal perspective, ECTR is associated with lower costs as a result of an earlier return to work and leads to higher QALYs. Additional research on return to work is needed to confirm these findings on the basis of contemporary return-to-work practices. From a payer perspective, ECTR is more expensive and is cost-effective only if performed in an office setting under local anesthesia.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic and Decision Analysis Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Sickness absence after carpal tunnel release: a multicentre prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To describe when patients return to different types of work after elective carpal tunnel release (CTR) surgery and identify the factors associated with the duration of sickness absence.

DESIGN

Multicentre prospective observational cohort study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Participants were recruited preoperatively from 16 UK centres and clinical, occupational and demographic information were collected. Participants completed a weekly diary and questionnaires at four and 12 weeks postoperatively.

OUTCOMES

The main outcome was duration of work absence from date of surgery to date of first return to work.

RESULTS

254 participants were enrolled in the study and 201 provided the follow-up data. Median duration of sickness absence was 20 days (range 1-99). Earlier return to work was associated with having surgery in primary care and a self-reported work role involving more than 4 hours of daily computer use. Being female and entitlement to more than a month of paid sick leave were both associated with longer work absences. The duration of work absence was strongly associated with the expected duration of leave, as reported by participants before surgery. Earlier return to work was not associated with poorer clinical outcomes reported 12 weeks after CTR.

CONCLUSIONS

There was wide variation in the duration of work absence after CTR across all occupational categories. A combination of occupational, demographic and clinical factors was associated with the duration of work absence, illustrating the complexity of return to work decision making. However, preoperative expectations were strongly associated with the actual duration of leave. We found no evidence that earlier return to work was harmful. Clear, consistent advice from clinicians preoperatively setting expectations of a prompt return to work could reduce unnecessary sickness absence after CTR. To enable this, clinicians need evidence-informed guidance about appropriate timescales for the safe return to different types of work.

Comparing open conventional carpal tunnel release with mini-incision technique in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: A non-randomized clinical trial

Background

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common nerve entrapment neuropathy which is the result of the compression of the median nerve in the wrist. Currently, there is no consensus about the best treatment option. The purpose of this clinical trial was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing open CT release with mini-incision CT release.

Patients and methods

This clinical trial included 75 patients with CTS who were divided into two groups of 45 and 30 patients to undergo open-CT release or mini incision CT release respectively. Patients were evaluated pre-operatively, days after the surgery and then five months after the operation to record outcomes. At follow-up, the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain, patients' satisfaction, return to work, length of scar, paresthesia, grip and opposition strength were measured.

Results

A total of 75 patients (mean age: 52.13 years, 73.3% female) underwent CTS surgery. Forty-five patients (60%) had open-CT release and 30 patients (40%) had mini-incision CT release. Postoperative pain and scar length were significantly lower in the mini incision group compared to open group (p < 0.001). The mini-incision CT group returned to work earlier than open group with higher satisfaction (p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between two groups in respect to the improvement of the opposition, grip and paresthesia (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that mini-incision CT release improves pain more effectively and has better quality of life because of smaller length of scar, immediate return to work and higher overall satisfaction. Neurosensory and motor improvements were also seen in both techniques with the same clinical impact.

Occupation classification predicts return to work after carpal tunnel decompression

Background

The relationship between hand function, employment status and return to work (RTW) after carpal tunnel decompression (CTD) is unclear.

Aims

To investigate predictors of RTW following CTD.

Methods

We prospectively collected pre-operative and 1-year post-operative outcomes and RTW data for all patients undergoing CTD at one centre between 29 May 2014 and 29 May 2017. We used the Standard Occupation Classification 2010.

Results

Pre- and post-operative results were available for 469 (79%) of the 597 patients who had CTD surgery. Pre-operatively, 219 (47%) were employed, 216 (46%) were retired, 26 (6%) were not working due to long-term illness and eight (2%) were unemployed. Complete data sets were available for 178 (81%) of the 219 employed patients, of whom 161 (90%) were able to RTW. Of the rest, five (3%) had changed jobs and 12 (7%) were unable to work. Median RTW time was 4 weeks (interquartile range [IQR] 2–6 weeks). Significantly more patients undertaking manual labour were unable to RTW (15% versus 5%; P &lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference in mean number of weeks absent between manual (5.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.9–6.5) and non-manual workers (6.2; 95% CI 4.8–7.6) (P &gt; 0.05). Median pre-operative (difference 15.9; 95% CI 4.5–25) and post-operative (difference 43.2; 95% CI 13.6–43.2) hand function scores were significantly worse in patients who did not RTW (P &lt; 0.05).

Conclusions

Most patients can RTW within 1 year of CTD. Failure to RTW is more likely in manual workers and patients with poorer pre-operative hand function.

A Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Open and Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release Within the Same Patient

Background: Surgical management of carpal tunnel syndrome includes performing an endoscopic (ECTR) or open (OCTR) carpal tunnel release. Several studies have shown less postoperative pain and improvement in grip and pinch strength with the endoscopic technique. The goal of this study was to prospectively examine outcomes, patient satisfaction, and complications after both ECTR and OCTR in the opposite hands of the same patient. Methods: This was a prospective study in which patients with bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome underwent surgical release with both techniques, with initial operative approach randomized in the more symptomatic hand. Demographic data and functional outcomes were recorded, including the pain score, 2-point discrimination, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament testing, thenar strength testing, grip strength, carpal tunnel syndrome functional status score, carpal tunnel syndrome symptom severity score, and overall satisfaction. Results: Thirty patients completed the study; there were no significant differences in any measure at any of the postoperative time points. Symptom severity and functional status scores were not significantly different between groups at any evaluation. Subjectively, 24 of 30 patients did state they preferred the ECTR, mostly citing less pain as their primary reason, although pain scores were not significantly different. Differences in overall satisfaction were also not significant. Conclusions: Both techniques are well tolerated with no differences in outcomes. With the added cost and equipment associated with ECTR, and no added benefit, the usefulness of ECTR is questionable.

Does the educational level of women influence hand grip and pinch strength in carpal tunnel syndrome?

BACKGROUND

Grip and pinch strength are relevant functional variables for various activities of daily life and are related to the quality of life of patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).

OBJECTIVE

The main aim was to analyze the relationship between grip and pinch strength and the educational level in women with CTS.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

Thirty-one female patients with CTS awaiting surgery were assigned to the low education group if they only had primary education level (completed or not) and the high education group for those having higher education level. The assessments included: grip strength, pinch strength, Visual Analogue Scale, Quick DASH Questionnaire, Pain Catastrophizing Scale and the Tampa scale of kinesiophobia.

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference was obtained for grip strength (p = 0.027), pinch strength (p = 0.002) and catastrophizing (p = 0.038) between the two groups. No significant differences were observed for the other variables studied (p < 0.05). Grip strength was not related to individual factors: type of work, age, body mass index.

CONCLUSION

CTS patients with a low educational level exhibited reduced grip and pinch strength and more catastrophic thinking. Future studies should investigate the mechanisms involved in the loss of strength in patients with lower educational levels.

A prognostic model for the patient-reported outcome of surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Many prognostic factors have been studied in carpal tunnel decompression, but most studies consider only a subset of variables.

METHODS

Three thousand three hundred thirty-two operations were used to develop prognostic models, and 885 operations were used for validation. Outcome recorded on a Likert scale was dichotomized into success or failure. Modeling was performed with both logistic regression and artificial neural networks using 87 candidate variables.

RESULTS

Both approaches produced predictive multivariate models for outcome with areas under a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.7 in the validation data set. Patients with moderately severe nerve conduction abnormalities, night waking, a family history of carpal tunnel syndrome, a good response to corticosteroid injection, and women have better outcomes. Greater functional impairment, diabetes, hypertension, and surgery on the dominant hand are associated with poorer outcomes.

DISCUSSION

A multivariate model partially predicts the outcome of carpal tunnel surgery, aids decision making, and helps to manage patient expectations. Muscle Nerve 58:784-789, 2018.

Sickness absence after carpal tunnel release: a systematic review of the literature

Objectives The aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview of time to return to work (RTW) after carpal tunnel release (CTR), including return to different occupations and working patterns. Methods A systematic search from inception to 2016 was conducted using nine electronic databases, trial registries and grey literature repositories. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies reporting RTW times after CTR were included. Study risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias assessment tools. Time to RTW was summarized using median and range. Results A total of 56 relevant studies were identified: 18 randomized controlled trials and 38 observational studies. Only 4 studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. Reported RTW times ranged from 4-168 days. Few studies reported occupational information. Among 6 studies, median time to return to non-manual work was 21 days (range 7-41), compared with 39 days for manual work (range 18-101). Median time to return to modified or full duties was 23 days (ranges 12-50 and 17-64, respectively), as reported by 3 studies. There was no common method of defining, collecting or reporting RTW data. Conclusions This review highlights wide variation in reported RTW times after CTR. Whilst occupational factors may play a role, these were poorly reported, and there is currently limited evidence to inform individual patients of their expected duration of work absence after CTR. A standardized definition of RTW is needed, as well as an agreed method of collecting and reporting related data.

Person-related factors associated with work participation in employees with health problems: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The objective of this systematic review was to explore and provide systematically assessed information about the association between person-related factors and work participation of people with health problems. The research question was: what is the association between selected person-related factors and work participation of workers with health problems?

METHODS

A systematic review was carried out in PubMed and PsycINFO to search for original papers published between January 2007 and February 2017. The risk of bias of the studies included was assessed using quality assessment tools from the Joanna Briggs Institute. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE framework for prognostic studies.

RESULTS

In total, 113 studies were included, all of which addressed the association between person-related factors and work participation. The factors positively associated with work participation were positive expectations regarding recovery or return to work, optimism, self-efficacy, motivation, feelings of control, and perceived health. The factors negatively associated with work participation were fear-avoidance beliefs, perceived work-relatedness of the health problem, and catastrophizing. Different coping strategies had a negative or a positive relationship with work participation.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review provide more insight into the associations between different cognitions and perceptions and work participation. The results of this study suggest that person-related factors should be considered by occupational- and insurance physicians when they diagnose, evaluate or provide treatment to employees. Further research is required to determine how these physicians could obtain and apply such information and whether its application leads to a better quality of care.

Perspectives from Employers, Insurers, Lawyers and Healthcare Providers on Factors that Influence Workers' Return-to-Work Following Surgery for Non-Traumatic Upper Extremity Conditions

PURPOSE

Return-to-work (RTW) stakeholders have varied roles and may therefore hold their own perspectives regarding factors that may influence outcomes. This study aimed to determine stakeholders' perspectives on factors influencing RTW following surgery for non-traumatic upper extremity conditions.

METHODS

A questionnaire was distributed to RTW stakeholders via gatekeeper organizations. Stakeholders rated 50 potential prognostic factors from 'not' to 'extremely' influential. Data were dichotomized to establish stakeholders' level of agreement. Disagreements between stakeholder groups were analyzed using χ ². The relationship between stakeholder demographic variables and rating of a factor was determined via regression analysis.

RESULTS

One thousand and eleven stakeholders completed the survey: healthcare providers (77.8 %); employer representatives (12.2 %); insurer representatives (6.8 %); and lawyers (3.2 %). Factors with the highest stakeholder agreement for influencing RTW were: self-efficacy (92.2 %); post-operative psychological status (91.8 %); supportive employer/supervisor (91.4 %); employer's willingness to accommodate job modifications (90.7 %); worker's recovery expectations (88.3 %); mood disorder diagnosis (86.6 %); post-operative pain level (86.4 %); and whether the job can be modified (86.3 %). Disagreements between stakeholder groups were found for 19 (36 %) factors. The strongest disagreements were for: age; gender; obesity; doctor's RTW recommendation; and presence of a RTW coordinator. Respondents' characteristics (e.g., age, workers' compensation jurisdiction, work experience, stakeholder group) were associated with factor rating.

CONCLUSION

The factors stakeholders rated as having the greatest influence on RTW were predominately psychosocial and modifiable. These variables should be the focus of future research to determine prognostic factors for RTW for workers with upper extremity conditions, and to develop effective RTW interventions.

The Relationship Between Work-Disability Duration and Claimant's Expected Time to Return to Work as Recorded by Workers' Compensation Claims Managers

Purpose This research sought to determine whether there is a relationship between claimants' expected time to return to work (RTW) as recorded by claims managers and compensated days of work disability. Methods We utilized workers' compensation data from a large, United States-based insurance company. RTW expectations were collected within 30 days of the claim being reported and these were compared with the termination of total temporary indemnity payments. Bivariate and hierarchical regression analyses were conducted. Results A significant relationship between expected time to RTW and compensated disability duration was observed. The unadjusted correlation between work-disability duration and expected time to RTW was .25 (p < .001). Our multivariate model explained 29.8 % of the variance, with expected time to RTW explaining an additional 9.5 % of the variance in work-disability duration beyond what was explained by the covariates. Conclusion The current study's findings support the hypothesis that claimant RTW estimates as recorded by claims managers are significantly related to compensated-disability duration, and the relationship is maintained after controlling for variance that can be explained by other variables available within workers' compensation databases.

The Effect of Psychological Factors on the Outcomes of Carpal Tunnel Release: A Systematic Review

Background: Several studies report that psychological factors are associated with outcomes of carpal tunnel release. However, interpretation of the association is difficult as there are diverse outcome parameters and patient expectations are different. We performed a systematic review to assess the relationships between psychological factors and the various outcome parameters.

Methods: We identified 611 papers and selected 8 papers that fit the inclusion criteria. Psychological factors assessed were anxiety, depression, pain catastrophizing, coping, and mental health status. Outcomes of interest included satisfaction and measures of perceived level of function, pain, and physical measures of recovery.

Results: For satisfaction and perceived level of function as the outcome, three studies reported a significant association, one study found an association approaching a value of significance, and one study reported no association. For pain as the outcome, two studies reported a significant association. For physical measures, one study reported no association.

Conclusions: This systematic review found that depression correlates with postoperative pain, but that the association is less clear between psychological factors and outcomes such as satisfaction, perceived level of symptom and function, and physical measures of recovery. As pain may not be a primary symptom or outcome of CTS, we consider that the current literature does not strongly support the association between psychological factors and outcomes of CTR. This review could be of benefit during preoperative counseling in patients with psychological disturbances.

Prognostic Variables for Patient Return-to-Work Interval Following Carpal Tunnel Release in a Workers' Compensation Population

BACKGROUND

We hypothesize that depressive and anxiety disorders, chronic pain conditions, and work-related factors are significant determinants of the time interval for return to work (RTW) in the workers' compensation (WC) population following carpal tunnel release (CTR) surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed records of all WC patients who underwent open CTR surgery over a 5-year period by 1 of 3 fellowship-trained hand surgeons. One hundred fifty-two wrists in 108 patients (64 unilateral, 44 bilateral) met the inclusion criteria. Demographic, medical, and surgical data were obtained from patient records. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess predictors of RTW.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine percent of all patients returned to work full-duty. Average RTW duration in all wrists was 12.5 ± 11.3 weeks. Predictors of delayed RTW in bivariate and multivariate analyses were depression with or without anxiety, chronic pain disorders including fibromyalgia, preoperative opioid use, and modified preoperative work status. Job type, motor nerve conduction velocity, and bilateral surgery were not predictive of delayed RTW interval.

CONCLUSIONS

WC patients with depression, anxiety, or fibromyalgia and other chronic pain disorders were significantly more likely to have delayed RTW following CTR than were WC patients without these conditions. In addition, those who use opioid medications preoperatively and those with preoperative work restrictions were also found to have a significantly delayed RTW after CTR. Knowledge of these risk factors may help care providers and employers identify those WC patients who are most likely to have a protracted postoperative recovery period.

Simultaneous Bilateral Versus Staged Bilateral Carpal Tunnel Release: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis

The purpose of this study was to determine if simultaneous bilateral carpal tunnel release (CTR) is a cost-effective strategy compared with bilateral staged CTR for the treatment of bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was created to compare the cost effectiveness of three strategies (ie, bilateral simultaneous CTR, bilateral staged CTR, and no treatment). Direct medical costs were estimated from 2013 Medicare reimbursement rates and wholesale drug costs in US dollars. Indirect costs were derived from consecutive patients undergoing unilateral or simultaneous bilateral CTR at our institution and from national average wages for 2013. Health state utility values were derived from a general population of volunteers using the Short Form-6 dimensions (SF-6D) health questionnaire.

RESULTS

Both surgical strategies were cost effective compared with the no-treatment strategy. Bilateral simultaneous CTR had lower total costs and higher total effectiveness than bilateral staged CTR, and had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $921 per quality-adjusted life year compared with the no-treatment strategy. The conclusions of the analysis remained unchanged though all sensitivity analyses, displaying robustness against parameter uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical management is cost effective for the treatment of bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Bilateral simultaneous CTR, however, has lower total costs and higher total effectiveness compared with bilateral staged CTR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic and Decision Analysis I.

Rehabilitation following carpal tunnel release

BACKGROUND

Various rehabilitation treatments may be offered following carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) surgery. The effectiveness of these interventions remains unclear. This is the first update of a review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effectiveness and safety of rehabilitation interventions following CTS surgery compared with no treatment, placebo, or another intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

On 29 September 2015, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, AMED, LILACS, and PsycINFO. We also searched PEDro (3 December 2015) and clinical trials registers (3 December 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials that compared any postoperative rehabilitation intervention with either no intervention, placebo, or another postoperative rehabilitation intervention in individuals who had undergone CTS surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for primary outcomes using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach according to standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

In this review we included 22 trials with a total of 1521 participants. Two of the trials were newly identified at this update. We studied different rehabilitation treatments including immobilisation using a wrist orthosis, dressings, exercise, controlled cold therapy, ice therapy, multi-modal hand rehabilitation, laser therapy, electrical modalities, scar desensitisation, and arnica. Three trials compared a rehabilitation treatment to a placebo, four compared rehabilitation to a no treatment control, three compared rehabilitation to standard care, and 15 compared various rehabilitation treatments to one another.Overall, the included studies were very low in quality. Thirteen trials explicitly reported random sequence generation; of these, five adequately concealed the allocation sequence. Four trials achieved blinding of both participants and outcome assessors. Five were at high risk of bias from incompleteness of outcome data at one or more time intervals, and eight had high risk of selective reporting bias.These trials were heterogeneous in terms of treatments provided, duration of interventions, the nature and timing of outcomes measured, and setting. Therefore, we were not able to pool results across trials.Four trials reported our primary outcome, change in self reported functional ability at three months or more. Of these, three trials provided sufficient outcome data for inclusion in this review. One small high-quality trial studied a desensitisation programme compared with standard treatment and revealed no statistically significant functional benefit based on the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) (mean difference (MD) -0.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.39 to 0.33). One low-quality trial assessed participants six months post surgery using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and found no significant difference between a no formal therapy group and a group given a two-week course of multi-modal therapy commenced at five to seven days post surgery (MD 1.00, 95% CI -4.44 to 6.44). One very low-quality quasi-randomised trial found no statistically significant difference in function on the BCTQ at three months post surgery with early immobilisation (plaster wrist orthosis worn until suture removal) compared with a splint and late mobilisation (MD 0.39, 95% CI -0.45 to 1.23).Differences between treatments for secondary outcome measures (change in self reported functional ability measured at less than three months; change in CTS symptoms; change in CTS-related impairment measures; presence of iatrogenic symptoms from surgery; return to work or occupation; and change in neurophysiological parameters) were generally small and not statistically significant. Few studies reported adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited and, in general, low quality evidence for the benefit of the reviewed interventions. People who have undergone CTS surgery should be informed about the limited evidence of effectiveness of postoperative rehabilitation interventions. Until researchers provide results of more high-quality trials that assess the effectiveness and safety of various rehabilitation treatments, the decision to provide rehabilitation following CTS surgery should be based on the clinician's expertise, the patient's preferences and the context of the rehabilitation environment. It is important for researchers to identify patients who respond to a particular treatment and those who do not, and to undertake high-quality studies that evaluate the severity of iatrogenic symptoms from surgery, measure function and return-to-work rates, and control for confounding variables.

Associations between Distal Upper Extremity Job Physical Factors and Psychosocial Measures in a Pooled Study

Introduction. There is an increasing body of literature relating musculoskeletal diseases to both job physical exposures and psychosocial outcomes. Relationships between job physical exposure measures and psychosocial factors have not been well examined or quantified. These exploratory analyses evaluate relationships between quantified exposures and psychosocial outcomes. Methods. Individualized quantification of duration, repetition, and force and composite scores of the Strain Index (SI) and the Threshold Limit Value for Hand Activity Level (TLV for HAL) were compared to 10 psychosocial measures. Relationships and predicted probabilities were assessed using ordered logistic regression. Analyses were adjusted for age, BMI, and gender. Results and Discussion. Among 1834 study participants there were multiple statistically significant relationships. In general, as duration, repetition, and force increased, psychosocial factors worsened. However, general health and mental exhaustion improved with increasing job exposures. Depression was most strongly associated with increased repetition, while physical exhaustion was most strongly associated with increased force. SI and TLV for HAL were significantly related to multiple psychosocial factors. These relationships persisted after adjustment for strong confounders. Conclusion. This study quantified multiple associations between job physical exposures and occupational and nonoccupational psychosocial factors. Further research is needed to quantify the impacts on occupational health outcomes.

The importance, measurement and practical implications of worker's expectations for return to work

PURPOSE

Workers' own expectations for return to work consistently predict work status. To advance the understanding of the relationship between RTW expectations and outcomes, we reviewed existing measures to determine those which we felt were the most likely to capture the construct.

METHOD

A comprehensive search of the work-disability rehabilitation literature was undertaken. The review of the measures was conducted in three steps: first, a review of terminology; second, an examination of whether a time reference was included; third, an evaluation of ease of comprehension, and applicability across contexts.

RESULTS

A total of 42 different measures were identified. One of the most striking findings was the inconsistency in terminology. Measures were also limited by not including a time reference. Problems were also identified with regards to ease of understanding, utility of response options, and applicability in a wide variety of research and applied settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Most previously used measures contain elements that potentially limit utility. However, it would seem that further development can overcome these, resulting in a tool that provides risk prediction information, and an opportunity to start a conversation to help identify problems that might negatively impact a worker's movement through the RTW process and the outcomes achieved. Implications for Rehabilitation Return to work is an integral part of workplace injury management. The capture of RTW expectations affords a way to identify the potential for less than optimal RTW processes and outcomes. A mismatch between an injured worker's expectations and what other stakeholders might expect suggests that efforts could be made to determine what is causing the injured worker's concerns. Once underling issues are identified, work can be put into resolving these so that the worker's return to the workplace is not impeded.

Prospective, randomized evaluation of endoscopic versus open carpal tunnel release in bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome: an interim analysis

BACKGROUND

Most randomized trials have shown similar results with endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR); however, there are studies suggesting less postoperative pain, faster improvement in grip and pinch strength, and earlier return to work with the endoscopic technique. The goal of this study was to prospectively examine subjective and functional outcomes, satisfaction, and complications after both ECTR and OCTR in the opposite hands of the same patient, serving as their own control.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized study in which patients underwent surgery for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. The first carpal tunnel release was performed on the most symptomatic hand-determined by the patient. Operative approach was randomly assigned and, approximately 1 month later, the alternative technique was performed on the contralateral side. Demographic data were obtained, and functional outcomes were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively, including pain score, 2-point discrimination, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament testing, thenar strength, and overall grip strength. The carpal tunnel syndrome-functional status score and carpal tunnel syndrome-symptom severity score were recorded before surgery and at 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks postoperatively. Overall satisfaction with each technique was recorded at the conclusion of the study.

RESULTS

Currently, 25 subjects have completed final visit testing. There were no differences in pain score, 2-point discrimination, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament testing, thenar strength, or overall grip strength at any of the postoperative time points. Carpal tunnel syndrome-symptom severity score and carpal tunnel syndrome-functional status score were not significantly different between groups at any of the evaluations. Overall satisfaction, where patients recorded a number from 0 to 100, was significantly greater in the ECTR group (95.95 vs 91.60, P = 0.04). There were no complications with either technique.

DISCUSSION

This interim analysis, using the same patient as an internal control, suggests that both OCTR and ECTR are well tolerated with no differences in functional outcomes, symptom severity and functional status questionnaires, or complications. Although there were no differences between groups using our study metrics, patients still preferred the ECTR, demonstrated by significantly higher overall satisfaction scores at the conclusion of the study.

Carpal tunnel syndrome and work

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common peripheral nerve entrapment syndrome, and it frequently presents in working-aged adults. Its mild form causes 'nuisance' symptoms including dysaesthesia and nocturnal waking. At its most severe, CTS can significantly impair motor function and weaken pinch grip. This review discusses the anatomy of the carpal tunnel and the clinical presentation of the syndrome as well as the classification and diagnosis of the condition. CTS has a profile of well-established risk factors including individual factors and predisposing co-morbidities, which are briefly discussed. There is a growing body of evidence for an association between CTS and various occupational factors, which is also explored. Management of CTS, conservative and surgical, is described. Finally, the issue of safe return to work post carpal tunnel release surgery and the lack of evidence-based guidelines are discussed.

Entrapment neuropathy of the wrist, forearm, and elbow

This review discusses key diagnostic points and treatment guidelines for compression neuropathies of the wrist, forearm, and elbow. Recent treatment progress is reviewed, controversies are highlighted, and consensus is summarized. Limited or mini-open releases and endoscopic carpal tunnel releases are considered equally safe and efficient. Both methods are currently mainstays of surgical treatment.

Measures of patients' expectations about recovery: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Patients' expectations regarding their prognosis has been shown to affect recovery. We completed a systematic review to identify measures that assess patients' expectations of recovery.

METHODS

Eligible studies explored the association between patients' expectations of recovery, and return to work or claim resolution. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE and PSYCInfo) from inception to June 21, 2014, bibliographies of eligible studies, relevant systematic reviews and our personal files. Reviewers determined study eligibility and study quality, and completed data extraction.

RESULTS

Of 14,509 unique citations, 46 studies were eligible with majority of the studies (n = 27; 59 %) rated as low quality, primarily due to substantial missing data and inappropriate adjustment for age, gender and illness severity in their regression models. We identified 5 measures and 41 individual items assessing recovery expectations. Three of seven (43 %) studies using a measure to assess recovery expectations reported psychometric properties, with only one reporting both reliability and construct validity. Only two measures (Expectations of Recovery Scale and the Work-related Recovery Expectations Questionnaire) were externally validated in different populations. Overall, 44 (96 %) studies found that patient recovery expectations was a significant predictor of return to work or sick leave/disability claim resolution.

CONCLUSIONS

Very few studies assessing recovery expectations use a psychometrically valid measure. Current evidence suggests that patients with lower recovery expectations are less likely to resolve their disability claim or return to work versus patients with higher recovery expectations. Further validation of existing measures for assessing patient recovery expectations, or development of a new measure that addresses the limitations of existing ones, is required.

Endoscopic release for carpal tunnel syndrome

BACKGROUND

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common compressive neuropathy of the upper extremity. It is caused by increased pressure on the median nerve between the transverse carpal ligament and the carpal bones. Surgical treatment consists of the release of the nerve by cutting the transverse carpal ligament. This can be done either with an open approach or endoscopically.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of the endoscopic techniques of carpal tunnel release compared to any other surgical intervention for the treatment of CTS. More specifically, to evaluate the relative impact of endoscopic techniques in relieving symptoms, producing functional recovery (return to work and return to daily activities) and reducing complication rates.

SEARCH METHODS

This review fully incorporates the results of searches conducted up to 5 November 2012, when we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE. There were no language restrictions. We reviewed the reference lists of relevant articles and contacted trial authors. We also searched trial registers for ongoing trials. We performed a preliminary screen of searches to November 2013 to identify any additional recent publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included any randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) with any other surgical intervention for the treatment of CTS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies (2586 hands) were included. Twenty-three studies compared ECTR to standard open carpal tunnel release (OCTR), five studies compared ECTR with OCTR using a modified incision, and two studies used a three-arm design to compare ECTR, standard OCTR and modified OCTR.At short-term follow-up (three months or less), only one study provided data for overall improvement. We found no differences on the Symptom Severity Scale (SSS) (scale zero to five) (five studies, standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.13, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.21) or on the Functional Status Scale (FSS) (scale zero to five) (five studies, SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.14) within three months postoperatively between ECTR and OCTR. Pain scores favoured ECTR over conventional OCTR (two studies, SMD -0.41, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.18). No difference was found between ECTR and OCTR (standard and modified) when pain was assessed on non-continuous dichotomous scales (five studies, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.45). Also, no difference was found in numbness (five studies, RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.71). Grip strength was increased after ECTR when compared with OCTR (six studies, SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.63). This corresponds to a mean difference (MD) of 4 kg (95% CI 1 to 6.9 kg) when compared with OCTR, which is probably not clinically significant.In the long term (more than three months postoperatively) there was no significant difference in overall improvement between ECTR and OCTR (four studies, RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.14). SSS and FSS were also similar in both treatment groups (two studies, MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.22 for SSS and MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.16 for FSS). ECTR and OCTR did not differ in the long term in pain (six studies, RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.38) or in numbness (four studies, RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.35). Results from grip strength testing favoured ECTR (two studies, SMD 1.13, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.71), corresponding to an MD of 11 kg (95% CI 6.2 to 18.81). Participants treated with ECTR returned to work or daily activities eight days earlier than participants treated with OCTR (four studies, MD -8.10 days, 95% CI -14.28 to -1.92 days).Both treatments were equally safe with only a few reports of major complications (mainly with complex regional pain syndrome) (15 studies, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.64).ECTR resulted in a significantly lower rate of minor complications (18 studies, RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.81), corresponding to a 45% relative drop in the probability of complications (95% CI 62% to 19%). ECTR more frequently resulted in transient nerve problems (ie, neurapraxia, numbness, and paraesthesiae), while OCTR had more wound problems (ie, infection, hypertrophic scarring, and scar tenderness). ECTR was safer than OCTR when the total number of complications were assessed (20 studies, RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40 to 90) representing a relative drop in the probability by 40% (95% CI 60% to 10%).Rates of recurrence of symptoms and the need for repeated surgery were comparable between ECTR and OCTR groups.The overall risk of bias in studies that contribute data to these results is rather high; fewer than 25% of the included studies had adequate allocation concealment, generation of allocation sequence or blinding of the outcome assessor.The quality of evidence in this review may be considered as generally low. Five of the studies were presented only as abstracts, with insufficient information to judge their risk of bias. In selection bias, attrition bias or other bias (baseline differences and financial conflict of interest) we could not reach a safe judgement regarding a high or low risk of bias. Blinding of participants is impossible due to the nature of interventions.We identified three further potentially eligible studies upon updating searches just prior to publication. These compared ECTR with OCTR (two studies) or mini-open carpal tunnel release (one study) and will be fully assessed when we update the review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this review, with support from low quality evidence only, OCTR and ECTR for carpal tunnel release are about as effective as each other in relieving symptoms and improving functional status, although there may be a functionally significant benefit of ECTR over OCTR in improvement in grip strength. ECTR appears to be associated with fewer minor complications compared to OCTR, but we found no difference in the rates of major complications. Return to work is faster after endoscopic release, by eight days on average. Conclusions from this review are limited by the high risk of bias, statistical imprecision and inconsistency in the included studies.

Rehabilitation following carpal tunnel release

BACKGROUND

Various rehabilitation treatments may be offered following carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) surgery. The effectiveness of these interventions remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effectiveness of rehabilitation following CTS surgery compared with no treatment, placebo, or another intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

On 3 April 2012, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (3 April 2012), CENTRAL (2012, Issue 3), MEDLINE (January 1966 to March 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to March 2012), CINAHL Plus (January 1937 to March 2012), AMED (January 1985 to April 2012), LILACS (January 1982 to March 2012), PsycINFO (January 1806 to March 2012), PEDRO (29 January 2013) and clinical trials registers (29 January 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials that compared any postoperative rehabilitation intervention with either no intervention, placebo or another postoperative rehabilitation intervention in individuals who had undergone CTS surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias according to standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

In this review we included 20 trials with a total of 1445 participants. We studied different rehabilitation treatments including: immobilisation using a wrist orthosis, dressings, exercise, controlled cold therapy, ice therapy, multimodal hand rehabilitation, laser therapy, electrical modalities, scar desensitisation, and arnica. Three trials compared a rehabilitation treatment to a placebo comparison; three trials compared rehabilitation to a no treatment control; three trials compared rehabilitation to standard care; and 14 trials compared various rehabilitation treatments to one another.Overall, the included studies were very low in quality. Eleven trials explicitly reported random sequence generation and, of these, three adequately concealed the allocation sequence. Four trials achieved blinding of both participants and outcome assessors. Five studies were at high risk of bias from incompleteness of outcome data at one or more time intervals. Eight trials had a high risk of selective reporting bias.The trials were heterogenous in terms of the treatments provided, the duration of interventions, the nature and timing of outcomes measured and setting. Therefore, we were not able to pool results across trials.Four trials reported our primary outcome, change in self reported functional ability at three months or longer. Of these, three trials provided sufficient outcome data for inclusion in this review. One small high quality trial studied a desensitisation program compared to standard treatment and revealed no statistically significant functional benefit based on the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) (MD -0.03; 95% CI -0.39 to 0.33). One moderate quality trial assessed participants six months post surgery using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and found no significant difference between a no formal therapy group and a two-week course of multimodal therapy commenced at five to seven days post surgery (MD 1.00; 95% CI -4.44 to 6.44). One very low quality quasi-randomised trial found no statistically significant difference in function on the BCTQ at three months post surgery with early immobilisation (plaster wrist orthosis worn until suture removal) compared with a splint and late mobilisation (MD 0.39; 95% CI -0.45 to 1.23).The differences between the treatments for the secondary outcome measures (change in self reported functional ability measured at less than three months; change in CTS symptoms; change in CTS-related impairment measures; presence of iatrogenic symptoms from surgery; return to work or occupation; and change in neurophysiological parameters) were generally small and not statistically significant. Few studies reported adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited and, in general, low quality evidence for the benefit of the reviewed interventions. People who have had CTS surgery should be informed about the limited evidence of the effectiveness of postoperative rehabilitation interventions. Until the results of more high quality trials that assess the effectiveness and safety of various rehabilitation treatments have been reported, the decision to provide rehabilitation following CTS surgery should be based on the clinician's expertise, the patient's preferences and the context of the rehabilitation environment. It is important for researchers to identify patients who respond to a certain treatment and those who do not, and to undertake high quality studies that evaluate the severity of iatrogenic symptoms from the surgery, measure function and return-to-work rates, and control for confounding variables.

Ultrasound as a first-line test in the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) recommends that surgeons obtain a confirmatory test in patients for whom carpal tunnel surgery is being considered. The AAOS, however, does not specify a preferred test. Ultrasound reportedly causes less patient discomfort and takes less time to perform, while maintaining comparable sensitivity and specificity to electrodiagnostic testing (EDX).

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We determined whether ultrasound as a first-line diagnostic test is more cost-effective than using EDX alone or using ultrasound alone: (1) when used by a general practitioner; and (2) when used by a specialist.

METHODS

A fictional population of patients was created and each patient was randomly assigned a probability of having true-positive, false-positive, true-negative, and true-positive ultrasound and EDX tests over an expected range of sensitivity and specificity values using Monte Carlo methods. Charges were assigned based on Medicare charges for diagnostic tests and estimates of missed time from work.

RESULTS

The average charge for the use of ultrasound as a first-line diagnostic test followed by EDX for confirmation of a negative ultrasound test was $562.90 per patient in the general practitioner scenario and $369.50 per patient in the specialist scenario, compared with $400.30 and $428.30 for EDX alone, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of diagnostic ultrasound as a first-line test for confirmation of a clinical diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome is a more cost-effective strategy in the specialist population and results in improved false-negative rates in the generalist population despite increased cost.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, economic and decision analyses. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Influence of compensation status on time off work after carpal tunnel release and rotator cuff surgery: a meta-analysis

Background

The assessment of post-surgical outcomes among patients with Workers’ Compensation is challenging as their results are typically worse compared to those who do not receive this compensation. These patients’ time to return to work is a relevant outcome measure as it illustrates the economic and social implications of this phenomenon. In this meta-analysis we aimed to assess the influence of this factor, comparing compensated and non-compensated patients.

Findings

Two authors independently searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, Google Scholar, LILACS and the Cochrane Library and also searched for references from the retrieved studies. We aimed to find prospective studies that compared carpal tunnel release and elective rotator cuff surgery outcomes for Workers’ Compensation patients versus their non-compensated counterparts. We assessed the studies’ quality using the Guyatt & Busse Risk of Bias Tool. Data collection was performed to depict included studies characteristics and meta-analysis. Three studies were included in the review. Two of these studies assessed the outcomes following carpal tunnel release while the other focused on rotator cuff repair. The results demonstrated that time to return to work was longer for patients that were compensated and that there was a strong association between this outcome and compensation status - Standard Mean Difference, 1.35 (IC 95%; 0.91-1.80, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that compensated patients have a longer return to work time following carpal tunnel release and elective rotator cuff surgery, compared to patients who did not receive compensation. Surgeons and health providers should be mindful of this phenomenon when evaluating the prognosis of a surgery for a patient receiving compensation for their condition.

Type of study/level of evidence

Meta-analysis of prospective Studies/ Level III

Workers' compensation status: does it affect orthopaedic surgery outcomes? A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Previous reviews have demonstrated that patient outcomes following orthopaedic surgery are strongly influenced by the presence of Workers' Compensation. However, the variability in the reviews' methodology may have inflated the estimated strength of this association. The main objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the influence of Workers' Compensation on the outcomes of orthopaedic surgical procedures.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the literature published in this area from 1992-2012, with no language restrictions. The following databases were used MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, Google Scholar, LILACS and Pubmed. We also hand-searched the reference sections of all selected papers. We included all prospective studies evaluating the effect of compensation status on outcomes in adult patients who had undergone surgery due to orthopaedic conditions or diseases. Outcomes of interest included disease specific, region specific and/or overall quality of life scales/questionnaires and surgeons' personal judgment of the results. We used an assessment tool to appraise the quality of all included studies. We used Review Manager to create forest plots to summarize study data and funnel plots for the assessment of publication bias.

RESULTS

Twenty studies met our eligibility criteria. The overall risk ratio for experiencing an unsatisfactory result after orthopaedic surgery for patients with compensation compared to non-compensated patients is 2.08 (95% CI 1.54-2.82). A similar association was shown for continuous data extracted from the studies using assessment scales or questionnaires (Standard Mean Difference = -0.70 95% CI -0.97- -0.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients who undergo orthopaedic surgical procedures, those receiving Workers' Compensation experience a two-fold greater risk of a negative outcome. Our findings show a considerably lower estimate of risk compared to previous reviews that include retrospective data. Further research is warranted to determine the etiological explanation for the influence of compensation status on patient outcomes. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42012002121.

Evaluation and treatment of failed carpal tunnel release

Treatment failure and complications are encountered in 1% to 25% of all carpal tunnel releases. Besides hematoma, infection, skin necrosis, and intraoperative iatrogenic injuries, persistence and recurrence should be included in this discussion. Persistence is often related to incomplete release. Similar symptoms recurring after a symptom-free interval of 6 months are considered recurrent and may be caused by intraneural or perineural scarring. Adequate diagnosis and treatment of these failures can be challenging. Operative release is the main treatment consisting of complete decompression of the median nerve. In some circumstances, coverage of the median nerve may be necessary.

Expected and actual improvement of symptoms with carpal tunnel release

PURPOSE

This study tested the null hypothesis that there is no difference between expected improvement and actual improvement of symptoms with carpal tunnel release (CTR). Secondary analyses addressed factors associated with both expected relief and actual relief of symptoms with carpal tunnel syndrome surgical release, predictors of arm-specific disability, and satisfaction with surgery.

METHODS

Sixty-six employed, English-speaking adult patients requesting limited-incision open CTR for electrodiagnostically confirmed carpal tunnel syndrome completed questionnaires before and after surgery. Before surgery, patients completed a survey regarding demographic data, expected improvement of symptoms with surgery, expected return to work after surgery, and validated questionnaires assessing arm-specific disability, job burnout, depressive symptoms, catastrophic thinking, and pain anxiety. An average of 6 ± 5 months (range, 40 d to 19 mo) after surgery, participants completed questionnaires regarding actual improvement of symptoms with surgery, actual return to work, satisfaction with surgery, and arm-specific disability.

RESULTS

Patients' actual and expected improvements with CTR were similar, with the exception of sleep disturbance, which was an average 0.3 points better than patients expected on a 5-point Likert scale. Lower postoperative disability was associated with men, less catastrophic thinking, and greater actual improvement of weakness with CTR. Fifty-three percent of the variation in satisfaction with treatment was associated with single status, more education, and relief of pain, sleep disturbance, and tingling.

CONCLUSIONS

Actual relief of symptoms with CTR matched patients' expectations in an employed population. Satisfaction with treatment correlated with relief of symptoms.