Skip Navigation


Occupational Medicine Advance Access originally published online on September 16, 2008
Occupational Medicine 2008 58(8):561-566; doi:10.1093/occmed/kqn123
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
58/8/561    most recent
kqn123v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bonauto, D. K.
Right arrow Articles by Wilcox, D. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bonauto, D. K.
Right arrow Articles by Wilcox, D. N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Evaluation of a symptom diagram for identifying carpal tunnel syndrome

David K. Bonauto1, Barbara A. Silverstein1, Z. Joyce Fan1, Caroline K. Smith1 and Dana N. Wilcox2

1 Safety and Health Assessment and Research for Prevention (SHARP) Program, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, Olympia, WA, USA
2 Insurance Services, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, Olympia, WA, USA

Background Hand symptom diagrams (HSDs) for rating the distribution of paraesthesias are proposed for use in epidemiological studies of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).

Aim To assess the validity of HSDs in a working population of manufacturing and service workers participating in a prospective study of musculoskeletal disorders.

Methods Assessment of each subject involved completing a HSD, a heath assessment and electrodiagnostic studies (EDSs). HSDs were rated for CTS blinded to the health assessment and EDS results. The validity assessments of HSD used EDS as the sole confirmatory standard for CTS.

Results A total of 733 subjects (65% of those eligible) participated in the study and 720 underwent EDSs. Dominant hand prevalence of a positive HSD and delayed nerve conduction studies in this working population was 9.2 per 100 workers. The sensitivity of a positive HSD for all workers was 0.28. By restricting the population to those workers with any current hand symptoms or to any worker with neuropathic hand symptoms, the sensitivities of HSD improved to 0.61 and 0.79, respectively. The positive predictive value of a HSD, with our study prevalence, was 0.48.

Conclusions The HSD classification schema has poor validity when applied to a general working population but improves when applied to workers with current neuropathic symptoms. The high number of false-negative HSDs in the general study population is most likely to be due to the inadequacies of using EDS as the confirmatory test. With a low prevalence of CTS, the positive predictive value for HSDs is poor.

Keywords      Carpal tunnel syndrome; epidemiological studies; musculoskeletal; screening


Correspondence to: David K. Bonauto, SHARP Program, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, PO Box 44330, Olympia, WA 98504-4330, USA. Tel: + 360 902 5664; fax: +1 360 902 5672; e-mail: bone235{at}lni.wa.gov


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.