21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      To submit to Bentham Journals, please click here

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Construct Validity and Responsiveness of Sensory Tests in Patients with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background and Purpose :

          Sensory evaluation is fundamental to evaluation of patients with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS). The purpose of this study was to determine the construct validity and responsiveness for sensory threshold tests in patients with CTS.

          Methods :

          Sixty-three patients diagnosed with CTS were evaluated prior to orthotic intervention and again at follow up at 6 and 12 weeks. Sensory tests included touch threshold PSSD (Pressure Specified Sensory Device) and vibration threshold (Vibrometer). Construct validity was assessed by comparing sensory tests to hand function, and dexterity testing using Spearman rho (r s). Patients were classified as either responders or non-responders to orthotic intervention based on the change score of the Symptom Severity Scale (SSS) of 0.5. Responsiveness of the sensory tools was measured using ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curves, SRM (Standardized Response Mean), and ES (Effect Sizes).

          Results :

          The PSSD had low to moderate correlations (r s ≤ 0.32) while Vibrometer scores had moderate correlations (r s = 0.36 - 0.41) with dexterity scores. The Clinically Important Difference (CID) for the PSSD was estimated at 0.15 g/mm 2 but was not discriminative. The Vibrometer demonstrated moderate responsiveness, with a SRM = 0.61 and an ES = 0.46 among responders. The PSSD had a SRM = 0.09 and an ES = 0.08 and showed low responsiveness for patients with a clinically important improvement in symptoms.

          Conclusion :

          Measurement properties suggest that the Vibrometer was preferable to the PSSD because it was more correlated to hand function, and was more responsive. Clinicians may choose use the Vibrometer opposed to the PSSD for determining important change in sensation after orthotic intervention.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in a general population.

          Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a cause of pain, numbness, and tingling in the hands and is an important cause of work disability. Although high prevalence rates of CTS in certain occupations have been reported, little is known about its prevalence in the general population. To estimate the prevalence of CTS in a general population. General health mail survey sent in February 1997, inquiring about symptoms of pain, numbness, and tingling in any part of the body, followed 2 months later by clinical examination and nerve conduction testing of responders reporting symptoms in the median nerve distribution in the hands, as well as of a sample of those not reporting these symptoms (controls). A region in southern Sweden with a population of 170000. A sex- and age-stratified sample of 3000 subjects (age range, 25-74 years) was randomly selected from the general population register and sent the survey, with a response rate of 83% (n = 2466; 46% men). Of the symptomatic responders, 81% underwent clinical examination. Population prevalence rates, calculated as the number of symptomatic responders diagnosed on examination as having clinically certain CTS and/or electrophysiological median neuropathy divided by the total number of responders. Of the 2466 responders, 354 reported pain, numbness, and/or tingling in the median nerve distribution in the hands (prevalence, 14.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 13.0%-15.8%). On clinical examination, 94 symptomatic subjects were diagnosed as having clinically certain CTS (prevalence, 3.8%; 95% CI, 3.1%-4.6%). Nerve conduction testing showed median neuropathy at the carpal tunnel in 120 symptomatic subjects (prevalence, 4.9%; 95% CI, 4.1%-5.8%). Sixty-six symptomatic subjects had clinically and electrophysiologically confirmed CTS (prevalence, 2.7%; 95% CI, 2.1%-3.4%). Of 125 control subjects clinically examined, electrophysiological median neuropathy was found in 23 (18.4%; 95% CI, 12.0%-26.3%). Symptoms of pain, numbness, and tingling in the hands are common in the general population. Based on our data, 1 in 5 symptomatic subjects would be expected to have CTS based on clinical examination and electrophysiologic testing.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity.

            The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) outcome measure was developed to evaluate disability and symptoms in single or multiple disorders of the upper limb at one point or at many points in time. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the DASH in a group of diverse patients and to compare the results with those obtained with joint-specific measures. Two hundred patients with either wrist/hand or shoulder problems were evaluated by use of questionnaires before treatment, and 172 (86%) were re-evaluated 12 weeks after treatment. Eighty-six patients also completed a test-retest questionnaire three to five days after the initial (baseline) evaluation. The questionnaire package included the DASH, the Brigham (carpal tunnel) questionnaire, the SPADI (Shoulder Pain and Disability Index), and other markers of pain and function. Correlations or t-tests between the DASH and the other measures were used to assess construct validity. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and other summary statistics. Responsiveness was described using standardized response means, receiver operating characteristics curves, and correlations between change in DASH score and change in scores of other measures. Standard response means were used to compare DASH responsiveness with that of the Brigham questionnaire and the SPADI in each region. The DASH was found to correlate with other measures (r > 0.69) and to discriminate well, for example, between patients who were working and those who were not (p<0.0001). Test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.96) exceeded guidelines. The responsiveness of the DASH (to self-rated or expected change) was comparable with or better than that of the joint-specific measures in the whole group and in each region. Evidence was provided of the validity, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness of the DASH. This study also demonstrated that the DASH had validity and responsiveness in both proximal and distal disorders, confirming its usefulness across the whole extremity.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Global rating of change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design.

              Most clinicians ask their patients to rate whether their health condition has improved or deteriorated over time and then use this information to guide management decisions. Many studies also use patient-rated change as an outcome measure to determine the efficacy of a particular treatment. Global rating of change (GRC) scales provide a method of obtaining this information in a manner that is quick, flexible, and efficient. As with any outcome measure, however, meaningful interpretation of results can only be undertaken with due consideration of the clinimetric properties, strengths, and weaknesses of the instrument. The purpose of this article is to summarize this information to assist appropriate interpretation of the GRC results and to provide evidence-informed advice to guide design and administration of GRC scales. These considerations are relevant and applicable to the use of GRC scales both in the clinic and in research.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Open Orthop J
                Open Orthop J
                TOORTHJ
                The Open Orthopaedics Journal
                Bentham Open
                1874-3250
                16 May 2014
                2014
                : 8
                : 100-107
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Health and Rehabilitation Sciences Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
                [2 ]Hand and Upper Limb Clinic, St. Joseph’s Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
                [3 ]School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                [4 ]Schulich School of Medicine, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
                Author notes
                [* ]Address correspondence to this author at the Hand and Upper Limb Centre, Clinical Research Laboratory (Basement), St. Joseph's Health Centre, 268 Grosvenor St., London, Ontario, N6A 4L6, Canada; Tel: 519-646-6000; Fax: 519-646-6049; E-mail: derek.kmcheung@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                TOORTHJ-8-100
                10.2174/1874325001408010100
                4040930
                475b96c7-9b59-4c2f-8f74-74e89c049ed2
                © Cheung et al.; Licensee Bentham Open.

                This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.

                History
                : 24 February 2014
                : 21 April 2014
                : 22 April 2014
                Categories
                Article

                Orthopedics
                carpal tunnel syndrome,clinically important difference,construct validity,orthotic intervention,psychometric properties,responsiveness,touch threshold,vibration threshold.

                Comments

                Comment on this article