Utilization of Neurophysiological Classification Systems in Determining Interventions for Patients with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Median mononeuropathy at or distal to the wrist, or carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), is the most common peripheral nerve compression disorder in the upper extremity. Neurophysiological classification systems for patients with CTS have been developed and implemented to provide health care providers an enhanced system of electrophysiological evaluation with a grading scale, so that they may evaluate their patients with CTS within a system that confers relative severity. Electrophysiological data collected within these classification systems includes either nerve conduction studies (NCS), or both NCS and electromyography (EMG) test results. The purpose of this study was to assess the utilization of neurophysiological classification systems in determining interventions for patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). METHODS: To assess the utilization of neurophysiological classification systems in determining interventions for patients with CTS, an on-line survey of referring providers to NCS/EMG (electrophysiological testing) clinics was developed. These clinical sites were asked to submit three referring providers of their NCS/EMG services. The survey was emailed to the referring providers with a letter of introduction that included an overview and purpose of the study and specifically stated their responses were completely anonymous and analyzed data would be in an aggregate form. RESULTS: Of the 35 referring providers of NCS/EMG services for their patients with CTS contacted to participate in this study, 14 providers completed the on-line survey (40%). This included 12 physicians (MD), one osteopathic physician (DO), and one nurse practitioner (NP). Twelve of the referring providers (85.7%) were familiar with clinical electrophysiological classification systems for patients with CTS. Nine referring providers use a neurophysiological classification system (Greathouse Ernst Hall Shaffer (GEHS) and Bland-six; GEHS only-two; alternate system-one). Five respondents did not use a neurophysiological classification system, two of which were not familiar with these classification systems. The nine providers who use a neurophysiological classification system for their patients with CTS found these systems useful in assessing patient prognosis, treatment planning, and communicating back to referral services. The most preferable treatments for the very mild and mild (sensory only; sensory and motor) classifications were splinting followed by oral medication and injection. Splinting and surgery (open and endoscopic) were the interventions of choice for the moderate/severe and severe electrophysiological classifications. CONCLUSION: Referring providers of NCS/EMG services completed an on-line survey to assess the utilization of neurophysiological classification systems in determining interventions for patients with CTS. The most preferable treatments for the very mild and mild (sensory only; sensory and motor) classifications were splinting followed by oral medication and injection. Splinting and surgery (open and endoscopic) were the interventions of choice for the moderate/severe and severe electrophysiological classifications. A method for using a neurophysiological classification system for patients with CTS in a clinical report is provided. Additional research to assess the prognostic validity and utilization of carpal tunnel classification systems as longitudinal outcome measures is needed.

PERTINENT DRY NEEDLING CONSIDERATIONS FOR MINIMIZING ADVERSE EFFECTS - PART TWO.

BACKGROUND: Dry needling (DN) is an evidence based treatment technique that is accepted and used by physical therapists in the United States. This clinical commentary is the second in a two-part series outlining some of the pertinent anatomy and other issues that are needed for optimal utilization of this treatment modality. Part one was an overview of the thorax with a summary of reported adverse effects (AEs) and the underlying anatomy that could be used to minimize patient risk. As is the case with any intervention, the technique of dry needling has some inherent patient risk. The incidence of AEs with this procedure is typically low, ranging from zero to approximately 10 percent. Knowledge of the underlying anatomy can be a key factor associated with decreasing the likelihood of an AE. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: The second part of this clinical commentary goes beyond the thorax, to explore the anatomy associated with dry needling the abdomen, pelvis, and back. In the abdomen, pelvis and back, dry needling can penetrate the peritoneal cavity or adjacent organs, resulting in AEs. A physiological reaction that is an AE secondary to a needle insertion, pain or fear, is an autonomic vasovagal response. Additionally, suggestions for dealing with the fearful patient, the obese patient, universal precautions, and other clinical considerations, are discussed. The purpose of parts one and part two of this clinical commentary is to minimize the risk of a dry needling AE. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Dry needling is an effective adjunctive treatment procedure that is within the recognized scope of practice of the physical therapist. An evidence-based implementation of the procedure must be based on a thorough understanding of the underlying anatomy and the potential risks, with risks communicated to patients via informed consent. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 5.

PERTINENT DRY NEEDLING CONSIDERATIONS FOR MINIMIZING ADVERSE EFFECTS - PART ONE.

BACKGROUND: Dry needling is an evidence-based treatment technique that is accepted and used by physical therapists in the United States. This treatment approach focuses on releasing or inactivating muscular trigger points to decrease pain, reduce muscle tension, and assist patients with an accelerated return to active rehabilitation. ISSUE: While commonly used, the technique has some patient risk and value of the treatment should be based on benefit compared to the potential risk. Adverse effects (AEs) with dry needling can be mild or severe, with overall incidence rates varying from zero to rates of approximately 10 percent. While mild AEs are the rule, any procedure that involves a needle insertion has the potential for an AE, with select regions and the underlying anatomy increasing the risk. Known significant AEs from small diameter needle insertion include pneumothorax, cardiac tamponade, hematoma, infection, central nervous system injury, and other complications. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Underlying anatomy across individuals has variability, requiring an in-depth knowledge of anatomy prior to any needle placement. This commentary is an overview of pertinent anatomy in the region of the thorax, with a 'part two' that addresses the abdomen, pelvis, back, vasovagal response, informed consent and other pertinent issues. The purpose of the commentary is to minimize the risk of a dry needling AE. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Dry needling is an effective adjunct treatment procedure that is within the recognized scope of physical therapy practice. Physical therapy education and training provides practitioners with the anatomy, basic sciences, and clinical foundation to use this intervention safely and effectively. A safe and evidenced-based implementation of the procedure is based on a thorough understanding of the underlying anatomy and the potential risks, with risks coordinated with patients via informed consent. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Level 5.