Lateral Epicondylitis: Treatment Preferences from the Potential Patient Perspective.

Background: Knowing the questions and concerns that patients have regarding treatment options for lateral epicondylitis may allow for shared-decision making and potentially superior patient outcomes and satisfaction. In the present study, we aimed to further delineate patient preferences with treatment of lateral epicondylitis. Methods: An online, survey-based, descriptive study was conducted through Amazon Mechanical Turk. Survey participants were presented with a clinical scenario regarding lateral epicondylitis and asked four questions regarding treatment preferences for nonoperative treatment, whether they would consider platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection, and whether they would consider surgical intervention for recalcitrant symptoms. A Likert scale was used for responses. McNemar chi-square test was used for paired nominal data for statistical analysis. Results: A total of 238 survey responses were included. A majority (63%) of respondents elected to proceed with formal physical therapy. When given additional information regarding corticosteroid injections, 50.8% of respondents reported preferring physical therapy. There were no differences between groups for questions 1 and 2 (P = 0.90). Of the respondents, 75.2% were "likely" or "extremely likely" to consider PRP injection. When asked about surgical intervention, 74.8% of respondents were "likely" or "extremely likely" to proceed with continued symptoms. Conclusions: It is important to include patient preferences in treatment discussions of lateral epicondylitis. Survey respondents preferred formal physical therapy for initial treatment. A surprising majority of respondents were likely to consider a PRP injection. With prolonged symptoms, respondents were interested in discussions of surgical intervention and thus, it should continue to be offered to patients with recalcitrant symptoms.

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: As Seen from the Perspective of the Patient.

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common nerve compression syndrome in the upper extremity and is one of the most common problems treated by hand surgeons. Despite its ubiquity-or perhaps because of it-there is a lack of unanimity regarding how best to treat CTS and what the options for treatment are. This study aimed to explore what patients find important when deciding on treatment of CTS in an effort to improve the physician-patient shared decision-making process. Methods: An online crowdsourcing platform was used to recruit participants for this study. Study participants were first led through a clinical scenario in which the symptoms of CTS were explained. They were then asked a series of questions regarding what was important to them when deciding upon treatment. A Likert scale was used for responses. Results: In total, 268 participant responses were included in the study. A majority of patients responded that all surveyed factors were either very important or important when considering treatment. The risk of surgery was most important, whereas postoperative pain was least important. The risk of surgery was significantly more important to patients than postoperative pain and time out of work. The cost of surgery was significantly more important to patients than postoperative pain. Conclusions: Given the lack of consensus regarding an algorithm for the treatment of CTS, the patient's preference is increasingly important when formulating a treatment plan. The results of this study may better help physicians frame the discussion of treatment options for CTS with their patients.

Nonpalmar Endoscopic versus Open Trigger Finger Release: Results from a Prospective Trial.

The most common complaint after open surgical release for trigger finger is of pain and scarring at the surgical site. We hypothesized that use of a new nonpalmar endoscopic approach for release of the A1 pulley through an incision at the proximal digital crease would result in decreased scarring and faster recovery compared to those treated with standard open release. Methods: Patients with trigger finger were prospectively enrolled and treated with a nonpalmar endoscopic versus open surgical technique. Outcome measures included scar assessment based on the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) administered 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months postoperatively, time before return to work, occupational therapy visits, and overall satisfaction. Additional outcomes included pain medication use, operative time, and complication and recurrence rates. Results: POSAS scores were better in the endoscopic treatment group than in the open group at all time points with a statistically significant difference seen at 1 week and 1 month postoperatively. The endoscopic group returned to work sooner, required fewer occupational therapy visits, and had better overall satisfaction compared to the open group, but the differences were not statistically significant. Complication and recurrence rates did not differ significantly between groups. Conclusions: Patients treated for trigger finger with a nonpalmar endoscopic release through an incision at the proximal digital crease demonstrate significantly better scarring in the early postoperative period compared to patients treated with the open surgical approach. Treatment for trigger finger with this technique is as effective as the standard open technique.

Glomangioma of Uncertain Malignant Potential: A Case Report.

Glomus tumors are rare benign tumors which commonly affect the hand but are seldom seen extradigitally. Less commonly seen is the glomangioma, a variant of benign glomus tumor, and even rarer is the glomangiosarcoma, a malignant variant. Determining malignancy can be difficult and an intermediate diagnosis, glomus tumor of uncertain malignant potential, has been proposed. We present a case of a 56-year-old male with a recurrent forearm mass diagnosed as a glomangioma of uncertain malignant potential. Although the characteristics and behavior of malignant cases are still incompletely understood, it is important that a high index of suspicion be maintained when approaching these tumors, especially when large or recurrent. Glomangiomas should be included in the differential diagnosis when evaluating soft tissue masses in the forearm and should be evaluated for malignant features.

A New Technique for Radiographic Visualization of the Scaphotrapeziotrapezoid Joint.

Standard radiographs of the wrist do not provide adequate visualization of the scaphotrapeziotrapezoid joint. A radiographic technique that provides an improved and more complete visualization of the joint compared with routine views is described. [Orthopedics. 2020; 43(2):e123-e124.].