Open Versus Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: A Comparison of Opioid Prescription Patterns and Occupational Therapy Referrals

Abstract

Background: Endoscopic and open carpal tunnel releases (ECTR and OCTR) are safe and effective operations. We compared the approaches in terms of postoperative opioid refills and occupational therapy (OT) referrals. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) treated with ECTR or OCTR. Patients with isolated idiopathic CTS were included; patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral carpal tunnel release (CTR), revision CTR, and additional procedures at time of CTR were excluded. Outcomes included number of patients requiring an opioid refill and/or an OT referral within 6 months of surgery. Results: A total of 1125 patients met inclusion criteria. Endoscopic release was performed in 634 (56%) cases and open release in 491 (44%). Unadjusted analysis revealed no difference in number of patients requiring refills (6.0% vs 7.1%, P = .44), mean number of refills among those requiring one (1.29 vs 1.23, P = .69), total oral morphine equivalents (45.1 vs 44.7, P = .84), number of patients calling regarding pain (12.8% vs 14.7%, P = .36), OT referrals (12.1% vs 11.4%, P = .71), or average number of OT visits (4.5 vs 4.2, P = .74) for endoscopic and open techniques, respectively. Adjusted analysis revealed lower age, lower body mass index, and history of muscle relaxant as predictors of opioid refills, and in contrast to the unadjusted analysis, operating surgeon and surgical technique were predictors of referral to OT. Conclusion: Endoscopic CTR and OCTR did not differ in terms of unadjusted postoperative patient calls for pain, number of opioid refills, or OT referrals. After correcting for individual surgeon practice, endoscopic was associated with decreased odds of requiring postoperative OT.