Does Google's Bard Chatbot perform better than ChatGPT on the European hand surgery exam?

PURPOSE: According to a previous research, the chatbot ChatGPT® V3.5 was unable to pass the first part of the European Board of Hand Surgery (EBHS) diploma examination. This study aimed to investigate whether Google's chatbot Bard® would have superior performance compared to ChatGPT on the EBHS diploma examination. METHODS: Chatbots were asked to answer 18 EBHS multiple choice questions (MCQs) published in the Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) in five trials (A1 to A5). After A3, chatbots received correct answers, and after A4, incorrect answers. Consequently, their ability to modify their response was measured and compared. RESULTS: Bard® scored 3/18 (A1), 1/18 (A2), 4/18 (A3) and 2/18 (A4 and A5). The average percentage of correct answers was 61.1% for A1, 62.2% for A2, 64.4% for A3, 65.6% for A4, 63.3% for A5 and 63.3% for all trials combined. Agreement was moderate from A1 to A5 (kappa = 0.62 (IC95% = [0.51; 0.73])) as well as from A1 to A3 (kappa = 0.60 (IC95% = [0.47; 0.74])). The formulation of Bard® responses was homogeneous, but its learning capacity is still developing. CONCLUSIONS: The main hypothesis of our study was not proved since Bard did not score significantly higher than ChatGPT when answering the MCQs of the EBHS diploma exam. In conclusion, neither ChatGPT® nor Bard®, in their current versions, can pass the first part of the EBHS diploma exam.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Patients with Upper Extremity Arthritis: Overview of Systematic Reviews.

Background: Arthritis leads to disabilities impacting patients' physical and mental health. Objective: To synthesize the evidence on measurement properties of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for people with upper extremity arthritis. Design: Overview of systematic reviews (SRs). Methods: We performed an electronic search of 6 databases to retrieve SRs looking at any measurement property related to PROMs for people with upper extremity arthritis. Two authors rated the risk of bias (ROB) of the included SRs using AMSTAR. We extracted data on measurement properties from each SR. Results: From 6 included SRs, 6 PROMs (Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale [AIMS], AIMS-2, AIMS-Short Form, Cedars-Sinai Health-Related Quality of Life for Rheumatoid Arthritis (CSHQ-RA), Revised CSHQ-RA, and Influence of Rheumatic Disease on General Health and Lifestyle) were evaluated in 2 or more SRs. The ROB of the included SRs ranged from moderate to high. Low- to moderate-quality evidence was found of good construct and criterion validity, acceptable content validity, and good responsiveness of the AIMS. We found low- to moderate-quality evidence of good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of the CSHQ-RA. Conclusion: We found a moderate to high ROB in the included SRs on the upper extremity PROMs for patients with arthritis. More evidence was specific to upper extremity arthritis in measures not in common use versus well-validated measures used in upper extremity conditions and recommended in current core sets. These factors suggest an urgent need for additional research to improve the scope and quality of evidence before recommendations can be made specific to patients with arthritis. Registration Number: on PROSPERO CRD 42019137491.

Outcomes Following Surgical Interventions for Isolated Lunotriquetral Interosseous Ligament Injuries: A Systematic Review.

Ulnar-sided wrist pain can be attributed to various bony and ligamentous structures. The purpose of this review is to compare outcomes following surgical interventions for isolated lunotriquetral (LT) interosseous ligament injuries in adults. We assessed 202 procedures from 9 retrospective case series studies of low to moderate quality based on the Structured Effectiveness Quality Evaluation Scale. The comparative outcomes (ie, range of motion, pain, strength, quality of life, complications, return to work, and patient satisfaction) were aggregated and categorized under arthrodesis, capsulodesis, ligament repairs and reconstruction, and ulna shortening osteotomy procedures. Although the comparison of outcomes was largely inconclusive due to the heterogeneity and the omission of preoperative characteristic data, we did observe higher complications and reoperation rates post LT arthrodesis. It is recommended that all outcomes be standardized and presented uniformly with best practices developed to better characterize the injury's severity and integrity in future studies.

The effectiveness of biophysical agents in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome- an umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to summarize, synthesize, and integrate the evidence evaluating the effectiveness of biophysical agents compared to other conservative treatments, for the management of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). METHODS: This was an overview of systematic reviews (SRs). We searched several online databases and obtained SRs relating to managing CTS using biophysical agents. Two independent researchers screened and appraised the quality of the SRs using the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2 appraisal tool. We extracted information related to study characteristics as well as the effectiveness of biophysical agents for CTS, the effect sizes, and between-group significances. We categorized the information based on the type of biophysical agent. We also performed a citation mapping and calculated the corrected covered area index. RESULTS: We found 17 SRs addressing 12 different biophysical agents. The quality of the SRs was mainly critically low (n = 16) or low (n = 1). The evidence was inconclusive for the effectiveness of Low-level Laser therapy and favorable for the short-term efficacy of non-thermal ultrasound in improving symptom severity, function, pain, global rating of improvement, satisfaction with treatment, and other electrophysiological measures compared to manual therapy or placebo. Evidence was inconclusive for Extracorporeal Shockwave therapy, and favorable for the short-term effectiveness of Shortwave and Microwave Diathermy on pain and hand function. The corrected covered area index was lower than 35% indicating a low overlap of the SRs. CONCLUSIONS: The findings were based on low-quality primary studies, with an unclear or high risk of bias, small sample sizes, and short follow-ups. Therefore, no recommendations can be made for the long-term effectiveness of any biophysical agents. High-quality evidence is needed to support evidence-based recommendations on the use of biophysical agents in the management of CTS. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022319002, registered on 17/04/2022.

Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Provocative Maneuvers for the Diagnosis of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to summarize and evaluate the research on the accuracy of provocative maneuvers to diagnose carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). METHODS: The MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched, and studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of at least 1 provocative test for CTS were selected. Study characteristics and data about the diagnostic accuracy of the provocative tests for CTS were extracted. A random-effects meta-analysis of the sensitivity (Sn) and specificity (Sp) of the Phalen test and Tinel sign was conducted. The risk of bias (ROB) was rated using the QUADAS-2 tool. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies that assessed 12 provocative maneuvers were included. The Phalen test and the Tinel sign were the 2 most assessed tests (in 22 and 20 studies, respectively). The ROB was unclear or low in 20 studies, and at least 1 item was rated as having high ROB in 11 studies. Based on a meta-analysis of 7 studies (604 patients), the Phalen test had a pooled Sn of 0.57 (95% CI = 0.44-0.68; range = 0.12-0.92) and a pooled Sp of 0.67 (95% CI = 0.52-0.79; range = 0.30-0.95). For the Tinel sign (7 studies, 748 patients), the pooled Sn was 0.45 (95% CI = 0.34-0.57; range = 0.17-0.97) and the pooled Sp was 0.78 (95% CI = 0.60-0.89; range = 0.40-0.92). Other provocative maneuvers were less frequently studied and had conflicting diagnostic accuracies. CONCLUSION: Meta-analyses are imprecise but suggest that the Phalen test has moderate Sn and Sp, whereas the Tinel test has low Sn and high Sp. Clinicians should combine provocative maneuvers with sensorimotor tests, hand diagrams, and diagnostic questionnaires to achieve better overall diagnostic accuracy rather than relying on individual clinical tests. IMPACT: Evidence of unclear and high ROB do not support the use of any single provocative maneuver for the diagnosis of CTS. Clinicians should consider a combination of noninvasive clinical diagnostic tests as the first choice for the diagnosis of CTS.

Patient-reported outcome measures used for hand and wrist disorders: An overview of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Multiple options for patient reported outcome measures are available to assess patients with hand, wrist and elbow impairments. This review of systematic reviews (overview) evaluated the evidence on these outcome measures. METHODS: An electronic search of six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ILC, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and LILACS) was performed in September 2019, and updated in August 2022. The search strategy was designed to locate systematic reviews that addressed at least one clinical measurement property of PROMs used for patients with hand and wrist impairment. Two independent reviewers screened the articles and extracted the data. The AMSTAR tool was used to assess the risk of bias in the included articles. RESULTS: Eleven systematic reviews were included in this overview. A total of 27 outcome assessments were assessed, with DASH, PRWE and MHQ assessed by five, four, and three reviews, respectively. We found high-quality evidence of good to excellent internal consistency (ICC = 0.88-0.97), poor content validity but high construct validity (r > 0.70), moderate- to high-quality evidence for the DASH. The reliability of the PRWE was excellent (ICC >0.80), the convergent validity was excellent (r > 0.75), but poor criterion validity compared to the SF-12. The MHQ also reported excellent reliability (ICC = 0.88-0.96), and good criterion validity (r > 0.70), but poor construct validity (r > 0.38). CONCLUSION: Clinical decisions around which tool will depend on which psychometric property is most important for the assessment and whether global or specific condition assessment is needed. All of the tools demonstrated at least good reliability; therefore, the clinical decisions will rely on the type of validity for clinical application. The DASH has good construct validity, while the PRWE has good convergent validity, and the MHQ has good criterion validity.

Psychometric Properties of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for People With Ulnar Nerve Entrapment at the Elbow: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to systematically review, critically appraise, and synthesize evidence on the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for people with ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow (UNE). METHODS: CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus were searched for studies reporting on the psychometric properties of the PROMs used to assess pain, disability, and quality of life of people with UNE. Relevant data were extracted based on the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments 2018 checklist. Two authors independently rated the quality and risk of bias of the studies. A qualitative synthesis was performed according to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments guidelines. The results were categorized based on the identified PROMs, and all the psychometric properties were summarized and presented. RESULTS: Eight included studies had a quality score of very good or higher. Among all the included PROMs, the Patient-Rated Ulnar Nerve Evaluation (PRUNE) was comprehensively evaluated in 4 studies and had high reliability, appropriate correlation to the physical component summary score of the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (r = -0.68), excellent content (cognitive interviews), structural (factor analysis) and discriminative validities, and high responsiveness. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire was assessed in 5 studies and had appropriate properties, showing a high correlation with the 8-Item Short-Form Health Survey (r = 0.77) and PRUNE (r = 0.75) and moderate responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The PRUNE was the most specific to UNE, had the most supporting studies and evidence of excellent reliability, validity, and responsiveness and therefore was the preferred PROM. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire demonstrated more limited validation across 5 studies and had moderate responsiveness. Information on other included PROMs was limited in terms of psychometric properties. IMPACT: This study provides insight into which PROM is potentially more suitable for measuring outcomes related to UNE.

What Are Work-Related Predictors of Post-COVID-19 Home and Family Work Roles? A Cross-Sectional Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which pre-and post-COVID-19 work-related factors can explain post-COVID-19 home and family work roles. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional survey. The primary outcome measure was the Home and Family Work Roles Questionnaire. Descriptive statistical methods and multiple regression analyses were run. The significant predictors were further probed in a one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with a Tukey posthoc correction. RESULTS: In our sample of 1447 participants, the two significant predictors of post-COVID-19 home and family work roles were pre-pandemic paid job status (F [3, 1401] = 5.66, P < 0.001), and pre-COVID-19 home and family work roles (F [1, 1401] = 2509.26, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Greater pre-pandemic home and family role responsibilities, full-time and part-time employment pre-COVID-19 were associated with greater post-COVID-19 home and family responsibilities.

The Role of Perceived Job Exertion and Age as Moderators of the Relationship Between Gender and Upper Extremity Musculoskeletal Disability and Pain in Injured Workers.

Purpose This cross-sectional study aimed to determine if age and perceived job exertion (PJE) moderate the effect of gender on upper extremity (UE) disorders in injured workers. Methods We sampled a consecutive cohort of patients attending a specialty clinic for injured workers with UE musculoskeletal problems. We measured UE disability and pain using the Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QDASH). Participants reported their PJE on a Global Rating of Change scale ranging from 1 (minimal perceived exertion) to 15 (maximal perceived exertion). Linear regression was used to explore the effect of gender on QDASH. We probed the moderating role of age and PJE using floodlight regression and identified the Johnson-Neyman (JN) region of age and PJE, where the effect of gender on QDASH becomes significant at the 95% level. Results We analyzed 418 participants, of whom 44% were women. The effect of gender on QDASH was significant for women aged 49 or younger (JN-region border: Age = 48.5, effect = 4.4, SE = 2.2, p = 0.05). Women workers with UE disorders younger than 49 years old report higher levels of pain and disability than do men. After the age of 49 years, both men and women workers experience a similar worsening of UE pain and disability with increasing age. Pain and disability increase with increased perceived job demands similarly for both men and women workers. Conclusions Women younger than 49 years had higher levels of UE pain and disorders than men. Both men and women workers reported higher UE disability with an increase in their PJE.

Accuracy of diagnostic clinical tests and questionnaires in screening for carpal tunnel syndrome among workers- A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize and appraise the evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical examination tests and questionnaires for screening carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) among workers. DESIGN: Systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy METHODS: Electronic search of 3 online databases (CINAHL, Embase, Medline) was done on August 31, 2020. Studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy of clinical examination tests in workers, compared to a reference standard test, were included. Diagnostic accuracy measures such as sensitivity (Sn) and specificity (Sp) were extracted and reported for different clinical examination tests. The risk of bias and applicability concerns were rated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool by 2 independent reviewers. Diagnostic tests accuracy extension of the PRISMA guidelines were followed. RESULTS: Twelve studies reporting on the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical examination tests for workers suspected of CTS were included. Fourteen different clinical examination tests were evaluated in the studies, including sensorimotor, provocative maneuvers, questionnaires, and hand symptom diagrams (HSD). Ten of the included studies had an either unclear or high risk of bias. The most accurate tests to diagnose CTS in workers were the Katz HSD (with Sn ranging from 38%-93%, and Sp ranging from 25%-89%) and Kamath and Stothard questionnaire (Sn and Sp = 100%). Combination of Katz HSD with either the Phalen's maneuver or the Tinel's sign resulted in excellent Sp (83% and 89%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Low to moderate quality evidence indicates variability in individual clinical examination tests used to screen for CTS in workers. Diagnostic self-report tools consisting of hand diagrams and/or diagnostic questions provide low burden and high accuracy. Still, they require more rigorous investigation about their value alone or in combination with clinical assessment tests.

Diagnostic accuracy of sensory and motor tests for the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common entrapment mononeuropathy of the upper extremity. The previous systematic review of the diagnostic tests for CTS was outdated. The objective of this study was to compile and appraise the evidence on the accuracy of sensory and motor tests used for the diagnosis of CTS. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase databases were searched on January 20, 2020. Studies assessing at least one diagnostic accuracy property of the sensory or motor tests for CTS diagnosis were selected by two independent reviewers. Diagnostic test accuracy extension of the PRISMA guidelines was followed. Risk of bias and applicability concerns were rated using QUADAS-2 tool. Any reported diagnostic accuracy property was summarized. Study characteristics and any information on the accuracy of the sensory and motor tests for CTS diagnosis were extracted. RESULTS: We included sixteen clinical studies, assessing thirteen different sensory or motor tests. The most sensitive test for CTS diagnosis was the Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test (with 3.22 in any radial digit as the normal threshold) with sensitivity from 0.49 to 0.96. The tests with the highest specificity (Sp) were palmar grip strength (Sp = 0.94), pinch grip strength (Sp from 0.78 to 0.95), thenar atrophy (Sp from 0.96 to 1.00), and two-point discrimination (Sp from 0.81 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence was inconclusive on which sensory or motor test for CTS diagnosis had the highest diagnostic accuracy. The results suggest that clinicians should not use a single sensory or motor test when deciding on CTS diagnosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018109031 , on 20 December 2018.

Content validation of the Kamath and Stothard questionnaire for carpal tunnel syndrome diagnosis: a cognitive interviewing study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is essential for directing appropriate treatment; and for making decisions about work injury claims. The Kamath and Stothard Questionnaire (KSQ) is a self-reported tool used for the diagnosis of CTS. Comprehensibility and comprehensiveness of this questionnaire are critical to diagnostic performance and need to be established. The purpose of the study was to describe how potential respondents, clinicians, and measurement researchers interpret KSQ questions in order to identify and resolve potential sources of misclassification. METHODS: Hand therapists, measurement researchers, participants with CTS, and a control group were interviewed using cognitive interviewing techniques (talk aloud, semi-structured interview probes) in Hamilton, Canada. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A directed content analysis was done to analyze the interviews using a previously established framework. FINDINGS: Eighteen participants were interviewed. Areas, where questions were unclear to some participants, were recorded and categorized into five themes: Clarity and Comprehension (52%), Relativeness (38%), Inadequate Response Definition (4%), Perspective Modifiers (4%), and Reference Point (2%). Respondents also identified several symptoms of CTS that are not covered by the KSQ that might be of diagnostic value, e.g., weakness and dropping items. CONCLUSION: The content validity of the current iteration of the KSQ was not established. The problematic questions identified in the study have been reported to have low specificity and negative predictive values in a previous quantitative study. The content validity issues identified may explain the poor performance. Recommendations were made to modify the wording of the KSQ and the potential addition of three new questions. Future studies should determine whether the modified questionnaire can provide better diagnostic accuracy and psychometric properties. The results of this study may assist in ruling in or out CTS diagnosis to a wide variety of target audience, such as hand specialists, physical and occupational therapists, as well as family doctors.

Diagnosing Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Scales, Questionnaires, and Hand Symptom Diagrams-A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize and evaluate research on the accuracy of clinical diagnostic scales, questionnaires, and hand symptom diagrams/maps used for diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). DESIGN: Systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy. LITERATURE SEARCH: A comprehensive literature search of the MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase databases was conducted on January 20, 2020. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies that assessed at least 1 diagnostic accuracy property of the scales, questionnaires, and hand symptom diagrams used for the diagnosis of CTS. DATA SYNTHESIS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Risk of bias and applicability concerns were assessed using the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Diagnostic accuracy properties were summarized. RESULTS: Out of 4052 citations after removing duplicates, 21 articles met the inclusion criteria. Twelve articles reported on the diagnostic accuracy of scales and questionnaires, including the Bland questionnaire, Kamath and Stothard questionnaire, 6-item carpal tunnel syndrome symptoms scale (CTS-6), Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire, Wainner clinical prediction rule, and Lo clinical prediction rule. Positive likelihood ratios ranged from 0.94 for the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire to 10.5 for the CTS-6, and negative likelihood ratios ranged from 1.04 to 0.05 for the same diagnostic tools, respectively. Nine studies reported the diagnostic accuracy of the Katz and Stirrat hand symptom diagram. Positive and negative likelihood ratios ranged from 1.42 to 8 and from 0.78 to 0.05, respectively. Only 4 studies had high methodologic quality. CONCLUSION: Limited evidence supports high accuracy of the CTS-6, Kamath and Stothard questionnaire, and Katz and Stirrat hand symptom diagram. Other scales have lesser and more conflicting evidence. Further high-quality studies are necessary to examine the diagnostic accuracy of these tests to assist ruling in or ruling out CTS. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2020;50(11):622-631. Epub 16 Sep 2020. doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.9599.