Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Provocative Maneuvers for the Diagnosis of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author:

Dabbagh Armaghan1,MacDermid Joy C123,Yong Joshua4,Packham Tara L2,Grewal Ruby15,Boutsikari Eleni C6

Affiliation:

1. Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Physical Therapy, Western University , London, Ontario , Canada

2. School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University , Hamilton, Ontario , Canada

3. Roth McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Centre, St. Joseph’s Hospital , London, Ontario , Canada

4. Sengkang General Hospital Occupational Therapy Department, , Singapore

5. Western University Department of Surgery, , London, Ontario , Canada

6. National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Department of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, , Athens , Greece

Abstract

Abstract Objective The purpose of this study was to summarize and evaluate the research on the accuracy of provocative maneuvers to diagnose carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Methods The MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched, and studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of at least 1 provocative test for CTS were selected. Study characteristics and data about the diagnostic accuracy of the provocative tests for CTS were extracted. A random-effects meta-analysis of the sensitivity (Sn) and specificity (Sp) of the Phalen test and Tinel sign was conducted. The risk of bias (ROB) was rated using the QUADAS-2 tool. Results Thirty-one studies that assessed 12 provocative maneuvers were included. The Phalen test and the Tinel sign were the 2 most assessed tests (in 22 and 20 studies, respectively). The ROB was unclear or low in 20 studies, and at least 1 item was rated as having high ROB in 11 studies. Based on a meta-analysis of 7 studies (604 patients), the Phalen test had a pooled Sn of 0.57 (95% CI = 0.44–0.68; range = 0.12–0.92) and a pooled Sp of 0.67 (95% CI = 0.52–0.79; range = 0.30–0.95). For the Tinel sign (7 studies, 748 patients), the pooled Sn was 0.45 (95% CI = 0.34–0.57; range = 0.17–0.97) and the pooled Sp was 0.78 (95% CI = 0.60–0.89; range = 0.40–0.92). Other provocative maneuvers were less frequently studied and had conflicting diagnostic accuracies. Conclusion Meta-analyses are imprecise but suggest that the Phalen test has moderate Sn and Sp, whereas the Tinel test has low Sn and high Sp. Clinicians should combine provocative maneuvers with sensorimotor tests, hand diagrams, and diagnostic questionnaires to achieve better overall diagnostic accuracy rather than relying on individual clinical tests. Impact Evidence of unclear and high ROB do not support the use of any single provocative maneuver for the diagnosis of CTS. Clinicians should consider a combination of noninvasive clinical diagnostic tests as the first choice for the diagnosis of CTS.

Funder

Ontario Graduate Scholarship

CIHR Doctoral Award

Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Canada Research Chair

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3