Patients' views on early sensory relearning following nerve repair-a Q-methodology study

The effects of sensory re-education on hand function recovery after peripheral nerve repair: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve injury can result in both sensory and motor deficits, and these impairments can last for a long period after nerve repair.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effects of sensory re-education (SR) on facilitating hand function recovery after peripheral nerve repair.

METHODS

This systematic review was limited to articles published from 1970 to 20 December 2020. Electronic searching was performed in CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Medline databases to include trials investigating the effects of SR training on hand function recovery after peripheral nerve repair and included only those studies with controlled comparisons.

RESULTS

Sixteen articles were included in final data synthesis. We found that only four studies could be rated as having good quality and noted obvious methodological limitations in the remaining studies. The current evidence showed that early SR with mirror visual feedback and the combinational use of classic SR and topical temporary anesthetic seemed to have long- and short-term effects, respectively on improving the sensibility and reducing the disabilities of the hand. The evidence to support the effects of conventional classical SR on improving hand functions was not strong.

CONCLUSIONS

Further well-designed trials are needed to evaluate the effects of different SR techniques on hand function after nerve repair over short- and long-term periods.

Similar 2-point discrimination and stereognosia but better locognosia at long term with an independent home-based sensory reeducation program vs no reeducation after low-median nerve transection and repair

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective controlled study.

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies evaluated the effectiveness of sensory reeducation (SR) after peripheral nerve injury and repair. However, evidence for long-term clinical usefulness of SR is inconclusive.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to compare the sensory results of patients with low-median nerve complete transection and microsurgical repair, with and without SR at long term.

METHODS

We prospectively studied 52 consecutive patients (mean age, 36 years; range, 20-47 years) with low-median nerve complete transection and microsurgical repair. When reinnervation was considered complete with perception of vibration with a 256-cycles per second tuning fork (mean, 3.5 months after nerve injury and repair), the patients were sequentially allocated (into 2 groups [group SR, 26 patients, SR; group R, 26 patients, reassured on recovery without SR). SR was conducted in a standardized fashion, in 2 stages, as an independent home-based program: the first stage was initiated when reinnervation was considered complete, and included instruction in home exercises to identify familiar objects and papers of different roughness, and localization of light touch (eyes open and closed); the second stage was initiated when the patients experienced normal static and moving 2-point discrimination (2PD) at the index fingertip of injured hand, and included instruction in home exercises for stereognosia, supplementary exercises for localization of light touch, and identification of small objects (eyes open and closed). Exercises were prescribed for 5-10 minutes, 4 times per day. At 1.5, 3, and 6 years after nerve injury and repair, we evaluated the static and moving 2PD, stereognosia with the Moberg's pick-up test, and locognosia with the modified Marsh test. Comparison between groups and time points was done with the nonparametric analysis of variance (Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance).

RESULTS

Static and moving 2PD and stereognosia were not significantly different between groups at any study period. Locognosia was significantly better at 1.5 and 3 years in group SR; locognosia was excellent in 17 patients of group SR vs 5 patients of group R at 1.5-year follow-up and in 14 patients of group SR vs 5 patients of group R at 3-year follow-up. Locognosia was not different between the study groups at 6-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

A 2-stage home program of SR improved locognosia at 1.5 and 3 years after low-median nerve complete transection and repair without significant differences in other modalities or the 6-year follow-up of a small subsample.

Atypical sensory processing pattern following median or ulnar nerve injury - a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Due to brain plasticity a transection of a median or ulnar nerve results in profound changes in the somatosensory areas in the brain. The permanent sensory deprivation after a peripheral nerve injury might influence the interaction between all senses. The aim of the study was to investigate if a median and/or ulnar nerve injury gives rise to a changed sensory processing pattern. In addition we examined if age at injury, injured nerve or time since injury influence the sensory processing pattern.

METHODS

Fifty patients (40 men and 10 women, median age 43) operated due to a median and/or ulnar nerve injury were included. The patients completed the Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile questionnaire, which includes a comprehensive characterization on how sensory information is processed and how an individual responds to multiple sensory modalities. AASP categorizes the results into four possible Quadrants of behavioral profiles (Q1-low registration, Q2-sensory seeking, Q3-sensory sensitivity and Q4-sensory avoiding). The results were compared to 209 healthy age and gender matched controls. Anova Matched Design was used for evaluation of differences between the patient group and the control group. Atypical sensory processing behavior was determined in relation to the normative distribution of the control group.

RESULTS

Significant difference was seen in Q1, low registration. 40% in the patient group scored atypically in this Quadrant compared to 16% of the controls. No correlation between atypical sensory processing pattern and age or time since injury was seen.

CONCLUSION

A peripheral nerve injury entails altered sensory processing pattern with increased proportion of patients with low registration to sensory stimulus overall. Our results can guide us into more client centered rehabilitation strategies.