Treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome by low-level laser therapy versus corticosteroid injection: a randomized, prospective clinical study

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

To compare the effects of low level laser therapy (LLLT) and corticosteroid injection in patients with moderate carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Eighty-seven patients (143 wrists) with moderate CTS were randomized to the corticosteroid or LLLT groups. 40 mg of triamcinolone acetate solution was applied to carpal tunnel of 44 patients (74 wrist). LLLT was applied to 43 patients (70 wrist) five times a week, for a total of 15 sessions (fluence of 6 j/cm2 for 1 min per point at a wavelength of 830 nm). Outcome measures were numbness and pain, QuickDASH questionnaire, grasping tests, Tinel and Phalen tests, electrophysiological tests and MRI evaluations, which were tested at the baseline and 1st and 6th months after the treatment. Eighty patients (133 wrists) completed the study at the end of 6 months. VAS and Quick DASH scores were better in the corticosteroid group in the 1st month, but there were no significant differences between groups in the 6th month. Phalen and Tinel tests, strength tests, and motor distal latency improved significantly and similarly in both groups at the 1st and 6th months. Sensory distal latency and sensory nerve conduction velocity showed significant improvements in the 1st and 6th months only in the corticosteroid group. In both groups, median nerve intensity rate and palmary spring rate improved significantly after the treatment. Based on this study, corticosteroid injection and LLLT groups showed statistically significant difference at the 1st month (short-term), whereas there was no significant difference at the 6th month (intermediate-term).

Related collections

Most cited references 32

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Carpal tunnel syndrome: clinical features, diagnosis, and management.

Lisa Hobson-Webb, Luca Padua, Daniele Coraci … (2016)

Carpal tunnel syndrome is the most common peripheral nerve entrapment syndrome worldwide. The clinical symptoms and physical examination findings in patients with this syndrome are recognised widely and various treatments exist, including non-surgical and surgical options. Despite these advantages, there is a paucity of evidence about the best approaches for assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome and to guide treatment decisions. More objective methods for assessment, including electrodiagnostic testing and nerve imaging, provide additional information about the extent of axonal involvement and structural change, but their exact benefit to patients is unknown. Although the best means of integrating clinical, functional, and anatomical information for selecting treatment choices has not yet been identified, patients can be diagnosed quickly and respond well to treatment. The high prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome, its effects on quality of life, and the cost that disease burden generates to health systems make it important to identify the research priorities that will be resolved in clinical trials.

0 comments Cited 189 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

The shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire (QuickDASH): validity and reliability based on responses within the full-length DASH

Christina Gummesson, Michael M Ward, Isam Atroshi (2006)

Background The 30-item disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) questionnaire is increasingly used in clinical research involving upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders. From the original DASH a shorter version, the 11-item QuickDASH, has been developed. Little is known about the discriminant ability of score changes for the QuickDASH compared to the DASH. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the QuickDASH and its cross-sectional and longitudinal validity and reliability. Methods The study was based on extracting QuickDASH item responses from the responses to the full-length DASH questionnaire completed by 105 patients with a variety of upper extremity disorders before surgery and at follow-up 6 to 21 months after surgery. The DASH and QuickDASH scores were compared for the whole population and for different diagnostic groups. For longitudinal construct validity the effect size and standardized response mean were calculated. Analyses with ROC curves were performed to compare the ability of the DASH and QuickDASH to discriminate among patients classified according to the magnitude of self-rated improvement. Cross-sectional and test-retest reliability was assessed. Results The mean DASH score was 34 (SD 22) and the mean QuickDASH score was 39 (SD 24) at baseline. For the different diagnostic groups the mean and median QuickDASH scores were higher than the corresponding DASH scores. For the whole population, the mean difference between the QuickDASH and DASH baseline scores was 4.2 (95% CI 3.2–5.3), follow-up scores was 2.6 (1.7–3.4), and change scores was 1.7 (0.6–2.8). The overall effect size and standardized response mean measured with the DASH and the QuickDASH were similar. In the ROC analysis of change scores among patients who rated their arm status as somewhat or much better and those who rated it as unchanged the difference in the area under the ROC curve for the DASH and QuickDASH was 0.01 (95% CI -0.05–0.07) indicating similar discriminant ability. Cross-sectional and test-retest reliability of the DASH and QuickDASH were similar. Conclusion The results indicate that the QuickDASH can be used instead of the DASH with similar precision in upper extremity disorders.