3 research outputs found

    Splinting vs surgery in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome - A randomized controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) can be treated with nonsurgical or surgical options. However, there is no consensus on the most effective method of treatment. To compare the short-term and long-term efficacy of splinting and surgery for relieving the symptoms of CTS. A randomized controlled trial conducted from October 1998 to April 2000 at 13 neurological outpatient clinics in the Netherlands. A total of 176 patients with clinically and electrophysiologically confirmed idiopathic CTS were assigned to wrist splinting during the night for at least 6 weeks (89 patients) or open carpal tunnel release (87 patients); 147 patients (84%) completed the final follow-up assessment 18 months after randomization. General improvement, number of nights waking up due to symptoms, and severity of symptoms. In the intention-to-treat analyses, surgery was more effective than splinting on all outcome measures. The success rates (based on general improvement) after 3 months were 80% for the surgery group (62/78 patients) vs 54% for the splinting group (46/86 patients), which is a difference of 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 12%-40%; P <.001). After 18 months, the success rates increased to 90% for the surgery group (61/68 patients) vs 75% for the splinting group (59/79 patients), which is a difference of 15% (95% CI, 3%-27%; P =.02). However, by that time 41% of patients (32/79) in the splint group had also received the surgery treatment. Treatment with open carpal tunnel release surgery resulted in better outcomes than treatment with wrist splinting for patients with CT

    Conservative treatment options for carpal tunnel syndrome: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

    Get PDF
    Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common disorder, for which various conservative treatment options are available. The objective of this study is to determine the efficacy of the various conservative treatment options for relieving the symptoms of CTS. Computer-aided searches of MEDLINE (1/1966 to 3/2000), EMBASE (1/1988 to 2/2000) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (2000, issue 1) were conducted, together with reference checking. Included were randomised controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of conservative treatment options in a study population of CTS patients, with a full report published in English, German, French or Dutch. Two reviewers independently selected the studies. Fourteen randomised controlled trials were included in the review. Assessment of methodological quality and data-extraction was independently performed by two reviewers. A rating system, based on the number of studies and their methodological quality and findings, was used to determine the strength of the available evidence for the efficacy of the treatment. Diuretics, pyridoxine, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, yoga and laser-acupuncture seem to be ineffective in providing short-term symptom relief (varying levels of evidence) and steroid injections seem to be effective (limited evidence). There is conflicting evidence for the efficacy of ultrasound and oral steroids. For providing long-term relief from symptoms there is limited evidence that ultrasound is effective, and that splinting is less effective than surgery. In conclusion, there is still little known about the efficacy of most conservative treatment options for CTS. To establish stronger evidence more high quality trials are neede
    corecore