Matthew S Thiese1, Fred Gerr2, Kurt T Hegmann3, Carisa Harris-Adamson4, Ann Marie Dale5, Bradley Evanoff5, Ellen A Eisen6, Jay Kapellusch7, Arun Garg7, Susan Burt8, Stephen Bao9, Barbara Silverstein9, Linda Merlino2, David Rempel10. 1. Rocky Mountain Center for Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. Electronic address: matt.thiese@hsc.utah.edu. 2. Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA. 3. Rocky Mountain Center for Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 4. Department of Physical Therapy, Samuel Merritt University, Oakland, CA. 5. Division of General Medical Science, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO. 6. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA. 7. Center for Ergonomics, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI. 8. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH. 9. Safety and Health Assessment and Research for Prevention Program, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, Olympia, WA. 10. Division of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze differences in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) prevalence using a combination of electrodiagnostic studies (EDSs) and symptoms using EDS criteria varied across a range of cutpoints and compared with symptoms in both ≥1 and ≥2 median nerve-served digits. DESIGN: Pooled data from 5 prospective cohorts. SETTING: Hand-intensive industrial settings, including manufacturing, assembly, production, service, construction, and health care. PARTICIPANTS: Employed, working-age participants who are able to provide consent and undergo EDS testing (N=3130). INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: CTS prevalence was estimated while varying the thresholds for median sensory latency, median motor latency, and transcarpal delta latency difference. EDS criteria examined included the following: median sensory latency of 3.3 to 4.1 milliseconds, median motor latency of 4.1 to 4.9 milliseconds, and median-ulnar sensory difference of 0.4 to 1.2 milliseconds. EDS criteria were combined with symptoms in ≥1 or ≥2 median nerve-served digits. EDS criteria from other published studies were applied to allow for comparison. RESULTS: CTS prevalence ranged from 6.3% to 11.7%. CTS prevalence estimates changed most per millisecond of sensory latency compared with motor latency or transcarpal delta. CTS prevalence decreased by 0.9% to 2.0% if the criteria required symptoms in 2 digits instead of 1. CONCLUSIONS: There are meaningful differences in CTS prevalence when different EDS criteria are applied. The digital sensory latency criteria result in the largest variance in prevalence.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze differences in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) prevalence using a combination of electrodiagnostic studies (EDSs) and symptoms using EDS criteria varied across a range of cutpoints and compared with symptoms in both ≥1 and ≥2 median nerve-served digits. DESIGN: Pooled data from 5 prospective cohorts. SETTING: Hand-intensive industrial settings, including manufacturing, assembly, production, service, construction, and health care. PARTICIPANTS: Employed, working-age participants who are able to provide consent and undergo EDS testing (N=3130). INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: CTS prevalence was estimated while varying the thresholds for median sensory latency, median motor latency, and transcarpal delta latency difference. EDS criteria examined included the following: median sensory latency of 3.3 to 4.1 milliseconds, median motor latency of 4.1 to 4.9 milliseconds, and median-ulnar sensory difference of 0.4 to 1.2 milliseconds. EDS criteria were combined with symptoms in ≥1 or ≥2 median nerve-served digits. EDS criteria from other published studies were applied to allow for comparison. RESULTS: CTS prevalence ranged from 6.3% to 11.7%. CTS prevalence estimates changed most per millisecond of sensory latency compared with motor latency or transcarpal delta. CTS prevalence decreased by 0.9% to 2.0% if the criteria required symptoms in 2 digits instead of 1. CONCLUSIONS: There are meaningful differences in CTS prevalence when different EDS criteria are applied. The digital sensory latency criteria result in the largest variance in prevalence.
Authors: M M Homan; A Franzblau; R A Werner; J W Albers; T J Armstrong; M B Bromberg Journal: Scand J Work Environ Health Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 5.024
Authors: Arun Garg; Jay M Kapellusch; Kurt T Hegmann; Matthew S Thiese; Andrew S Merryweather; Ying-Chih Wang; Elizabeth J Malloy Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2013-11-16 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: Ryan P Calfee; Ann Marie Dale; Daniel Ryan; Alexis Descatha; Alfred Franzblau; Bradley Evanoff Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2011-10-05 Impact factor: 2.230
Authors: Stephen S Bao; Jay M Kapellusch; Andrew S Merryweather; Matthew S Thiese; Arun Garg; Kurt T Hegmann; Barbara A Silverstein; Jennifer L Marcum; Ruoliang Tang Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: Verena J M M Schrier; Stefanie Evers; Jennifer R Geske; Walter K Kremers; Hector R Villarraga; Sanjeev Kakar; Ruud W Selles; Steven E R Hovius; Russell Gelfman; Peter C Amadio Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2019-09-02 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Sietske J Tamminga; P Paul F M Kuijer; Kathryn Badarin; Jose Hernán Alfonso; Joana Amaro; Stefania Curti; Irina Guseva Canu; Stefano Mattioli; Ingrid S Mehlum; David Rempel; Yves Roquelaure; Steven Visser; Henk F van der Molen Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2021-12-04 Impact factor: 2.362