Çağatay ÖNCEL, L. Sinan BİR, Engin ŞANAL

The relationship between electrodiagnostic severity and Washington Neuropathic Pain Scale in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome

Amaç: Karpal tünel sendromu (KTS) olan hastaların, Washington Nöropatik Ağrı Ölçeği (NAÖ) ile değerlendirdiğimiz klinik semptomları ile elektrodiyagnostik sınıflamaları arasındaki ilişki olup olmadığını saptamayı amaçladık. Gereç ve Yöntem: Tek taraflı KTS’si olan seksen hasta çalışmaya alındı. Elektromiyografik olarak KTS tanısı konduktan sonra, hastalar 10 soru içeren NAÖ’yü yanıtladılar. Bulgular: NAÖ’nün toplam değeriyle KTS’nin şiddeti arasında istatiksel olarak anlamlı bir korelasyon bulundu (p=0.013, r=0.276). Sonuç: Çalışmamızda, NAÖ’nün KTS’li hastaların klinik gidişini değerlendirmede yararlı olduğu sonucuna varıldı.

Karpal tünel sendromlu hastalarda elektrodiyagnostik tanı ile Washington Nöropatik Ağrı Ölçeği arasındaki ilişki

Objectives: We undertook this study to examine the relationships between clinical symptoms as evaluated by Washington Neuropathic Pain Scale (NPS) and electrodiagnostic classification in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Methods: Eighty patients with unilateral CTS were included in this study. After diagnosis of CTS by electromyography, all patients completed a 10-item questionnaire (NPS). Results: A statistically significant correlation between total NPS score and severity of CTS was found (p=0.013, r=0.276). Conclusion: The present study indicates that using NPS might be useful in evaluating the clinical outcome of patients with CTS.

PDF

___

1. Kamath V, Stothard J. A clinical questionnaire for the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Br 2003;28(5):455-9.
2. Padua L, Padua R, LoMonaco M, Romanini E, Tonali P. Italian multicentre study of carpal tunnel syndrome: study design. Italian CTS Study Group. Ital J Neurol Sci 1998;19(5):285-9.
3. Padua L, LoMonaco M, Gregori B, Valente EM, Padua R, Tonali P. europhysiological classii cation and sensitivity in 500 carpal tunnel syndrome hands. Acta Neurol Scand 1997;96(4):211-7.
4. Stevens JC. AAEM minimonograph: the electrodiagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine.Muscle Nerve 1997;20(12):1477-86.
5. Galer BS, Jensen MP. Development and preliminary validation of a pain measure specii c to neuropathic pain: the Neuropathic Pain Scale. Neurology 1997;48(2):332-8.
6. Oh SJ. Nerve conductions in focal neuropathies. In: Retford DC, editor. Clinical electromyography: Nerve Conduction Studies. 2nd ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1993. p. 496-574.
7. Bland JD. A neurophysiological grading scale for carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 2000;23(8):1280-3.
8. Padua L, Padua R, Lo Monaco M, Aprile I, Tonali P. Multiperspective assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a multicenter study. Italian CTS Study Group. Neurology 1999;53(8):1654-9.
9. de Campos CC, Manzano GM, Leopoldino JF, Nóbrega JA, Sañudo A, de Araujo Peres C, et al. The relationship between symptoms and electrophysiological detected compression of the median nerve at the wrist. Acta Neurol Scand 2004;110(6):398-402.
10. You H, Simmons Z, Freivalds A, Kothari MJ, Naidu SH. Relationships between clinical symptom severity scales and nerve conduction measures in carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 1999;22(4):497-501.
11. Levine DW, Simmons BP, Koris MJ, Daltroy LH, Hohl GG, Fossel AH, et al. A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1993;75(11):1585-92.