Treatment of common congenital hand conditions.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Oda T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4404786 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Treatment of common congenital hand conditions.
Oda Takashi T Pushman Allison G AG Chung Kevin C KC
Plastic and reconstructive surgery 20100901 3
<h4>Learning objectives</h4>After reading this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Recognize the clinical features associated with five common congenital hand conditions. 2. Describe the indications and appropriate timing for various surgical procedures used to treat congenital hand anomalies. 3. Identify the pearls and pitfalls of these surgical treatments to avoid complications. 4. Understand the expected postoperative outcomes associated with these surgical procedures.<h4>Summary</ ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:INTRODUCTION:This compilation presents a comprehensive review of the literature on common chronic pain conditions of the hand. It briefly presents these common conditions with their biological background, diagnosis, and common management options. It then presents and compares the latest literature available for injection techniques to treat these diagnoses and compares the available evidence. METHODS:A comprehensive literature review was performed in MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases from 1996 to 2019 using the terms "hand pain", "injection techniques", "steroid injection", "chronic pain", "osteoarthritis", "rheumatoid arthritis", "carpal tunnel syndrome", "De Quervain's tenosynovitis", "ganglion cyst", "gout", "Raynaud's", and "stenosing tenosynovitis". RESULTS:Hand pain is a common condition with 9.7% prevalence in men and 21.6% in women and can cause significant morbidity and disability. It also carries a significant cost to the individuals and the healthcare system, totaling in $4 billion dollars in 2003. Injection therapy is an alternative when conservative treatment fails. Osteoarthritis is the most common chronic hand pain syndrome and affects about 16% of the population. Its mechanism is largely mechanic, and as such, there is controversy if steroid injections are of benefit. Hyaluronic acid (HA) appears to provide substantial relief of pain and may increase functionality. More studies of HA are required to make a definite judgment on its efficacy. Similarly, steroid ganglion cyst injection may confer little benefit. Carpal tunnel syndrome is a compressive neuropathy, and only temporarily relieved with injection therapy. US-guidance provides significant improvement and, while severe cases may still require surgery, can provide a valuable bridge therapy to surgery when conservative treatment fails. Similar bridging treatments and increased efficacy under US-guidance are effective for stenosing tenosynovitis ("trigger finger"), though, interestingly, inflammatory background is associated with decreased effect in this case. When the etiology of the pain is inflammatory, such as in RA, corticosteroid (CS) injections provide significant pain relief and increased functionality. They do not, however, change the course of disease (unlike DMARDs). Another such example is De-Quervain tenosynovitis that sees good benefit from CS injections, and an increased efficacy with US-guidance, and similarly are CS injections for gout. For Raynaud's phenomenon, Botox injections have encouraging results, but more studies are needed to determine safety and efficacy, as well as the possible difference in effect between primary and secondary Raynaud's. CONCLUSIONS:Chronic hand pain is a prevalent and serious condition and can cause significant morbidity and disability and interferes with independence and activities of daily living. Conservative treatment remains the first line of treatment; however, when first-line treatments fail, steroid injections can usually provide benefit. In some cases, HA or Botox may also be beneficial. US-guidance is increasing in hand injection and almost ubiquitously provides safer, more effective injections. Hand surgery remains the alternative for refractory pain.
| S-EPMC7203307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveImpact of appearance of congenital hand anomalies has not previously been reported. The purpose of this study was to describe the common perception about how different congenitally malformed hands look.MethodsWe developed a questionnaire in a game format to evaluate the appearance of different hands. Altogether 1450 (954 females) 4- to 84-year-old residents (296 children) of two European and one Asian (n = 102) country were asked to rate the appearance of different looking hands on a five-point pictorial Likert-type scale. Standardized photographs of the dorsal aspect of 17 different congenitally malformed non-operated hands and a normal hand were presented to respondents. Significance of age, gender, nationality, and profession of the respondents was assessed.ResultsThe respondents' ranking order of the hands was nearly consistent. The normal hand (mean = 4.43, standard deviation = 0.85, Md = 5) and clinodactyly (mean = 4.37, standard deviation = 0.86, Md = 5) were perceived to have the best appearance. Symbrachydactyly (mean = 1.42, standard deviation = 0.68, Md = 1) and radial club hand (mean = 1.40, standard deviation = 0.68, Md = 1) received the lowest scores. Adults rated the appearance of hands higher than children regarding 14 hands, females higher than men regarding 15 hands, and Europeans higher than Asians in 4 hands (p < 0.05, respectively). Europeans rated four-finger hand (mean = 3.21, standard deviation = 1.18, Md = 3) better looking than six-finger hand (mean = 2.92, standard deviation = 1.18, Md = 3, p < 0.005), whereas Asians gave higher scores to six-finger hand (mean = 2.66, standard deviation = 1.26, Md = 3) compared to four-finger hand (mean = 2.51, standard deviation = 1.14, Md = 2). Medical doctors and nurses gave higher scores compared to the other profession groups, school children, and high school students in five hands (p < 0.05).ConclusionsA normal hand is perceived distinctly better looking than most congenitally different hands. Different malformations' appearance was ranked very coherently in the same order despite of participants' age, gender, nationality, or profession. Asians seem to prefer an additional digit to a four-finger hand.
| S-EPMC8551435 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivePrioritisation of important treatment uncertainties for 'Common Conditions Affecting the Hand and Wrist' via a UK-based James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.SettingThis process was funded by a national charitable organisation and based in the UK.ParticipantsAnyone with experience of common conditions affecting the adult hand and wrist, including patients, carers and healthcare professionals. All treatment modalities delivered by a hand specialist, including therapists, surgeons or other allied professionals, were considered.InterventionsEstablished James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership methods were employed.Electronic and paper questionnaires identified potential uncertainties. These were subsequently confirmed using relevant, up-to-date systematic reviews. A final list of top 10 research uncertainties was developed via a face-to-face workshop with representation from patients and clinicians. Impact of research was sought by surveying hand clinicians electronically.Outcome measuresThe survey responses and prioritisation-both survey and workshop based.ResultsThere were 889 individually submitted questions from the initial survey, refined to 59 uncertainties across 32 themes. Eight additional uncertainties were added from published literature before prioritisation by 261 participants and the workshop allowed the final top 10 list to be finalised. The top 10 has so far contributed to the award of over £3.8 million of competitively awarded funding.ConclusionsThe Common Conditions in the Hand and Wrist Priority Setting Partnership identified important research questions and has allowed research funders to identify grant applications which are important to both patients and clinicians.
| S-EPMC8006829 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeWe sought to evaluate the use of pre- and post-referral advanced diagnostic testing among patients with 3 common hand conditions, rates of subsequent tests, and differences in wait time to see a hand surgeon.MethodsWe analyzed a single academic tertiary care center administrative database of encounters from 2006 to 2015 to identify adult patients who were referred to a hand surgeon for 3 conditions (carpal tunnel syndrome [CTS], soft tissue masses [STM], and joint pain [JP]). We recorded patient characteristics, use and timing of diagnostic tests, and wait time for the initial hand surgeon evaluation.ResultsAmong patients who received advanced diagnostic tests before the surgeon evaluation, CTS patients had the highest rate of receiving pre-referral advanced testing (53.4%) compared with JP (10.6% ) and STM patients (5.8%). The CTS patients had the highest rates of repeat testing (19.5%) compared with patients with JP (1.4%) and STM (0%). Across all 3 conditions, patients who received pre-referral advanced testing waited an additional 19 to 94 days to see a surgeon, compared with patients who received only post-referral testing or no testing.ConclusionsUse of pre-referral advanced diagnostic tests is associated with an increased time to see a hand surgeon for common hand conditions.Clinical relevanceHand surgeons should have a role in identifying patients who do or do not benefit from advanced testing before referral to ensure that tests ordered before consultation are useful to both patients and treating surgeons.
| S-EPMC7429450 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrior studies have suggested that patient-rated hand function is impacted by depression and pain catastrophization. We studied the impact that these comorbidities have on treatment outcomes.MethodsTwo hundred and fifty-six patients presenting to an orthopaedic hand clinic were followed in this prospective cohort investigation. Patients who were prescribed treatment for atraumatic hand/wrist conditions were eligible for inclusion. At enrollment, all patients completed the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ; scale of 0 to 100, with 100 indicating the best hand performance). One month and three months after treatment, patients again completed the MHQ. Participants' psychological comorbidity status was categorized as either affected (a CES-D score of ?16, indicating depression, or a PCS score of ?30, indicating catastrophization) or unaffected (a CES-D score of <16 and a PCS score of <30). Diagnoses and treatments for both the affected and unaffected groups were examined. The effect of time and patient status, and their interaction, on MHQ scores was evaluated by mixed modeling.ResultsFifty patients were categorized as affected and 206 as unaffected. Diagnoses and treatments differed minimally between the two groups. At the time of enrollment, the mean MHQ score of the unaffected group (64.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 62.5 to 67.3) was significantly higher than that of the affected group (48.1; 95% CI, 43.3 to 53.0). Both groups demonstrated similar significant absolute improvement over baseline at three months after treatment (an increase of 12.5 points [95% CI, 7.5 to 17.4] in the affected group and 12.8 points [95% CI, 10.4 to 15.3] in the unaffected group). Thus, at the time of final follow-up, the rating of hand function by the affected patients (60.6 [95% CI, 55.0 to 66.2]) was still significantly poorer than the rating by the unaffected patients (77.7 [95% CI, 75.0 to 80.5]).ConclusionsAlthough patients affected by depression and/or pain catastrophization reported worse self-rated hand function at baseline and at the time of follow-up, these patients showed similar absolute improvement in self-rated hand function following treatment compared with patients with unaffected status.Level of evidencePrognostic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
| S-EPMC4018773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Humans employ visually-guided actions during a myriad of daily activities. These ubiquitous but precise manual actions rely on synergistic work between eye and hand movements. During this close cooperation between hands and eyes, the hands persist in sight in a way which is unevenly distributed across our visual field. One common assertion is that most hand actions occur in the lower visual field (LVF) because the arms are anatomically lower than the head, and objects typically rest on waist-high table surfaces. While experimental work has shown that humans are more efficient at reaching for and grasping targets located below their visual midline (Goodale and Danckert, Exp Brain Res 137:303-308, 2001), there is almost no empirical data detailing where the hands lie in the visual fields during natural hand actions. To build a comprehensive picture of hand location during natural visually guided manual actions, we analyzed data from a large-scale open-access dataset containing 100 h of non-scripted manual object interactions during domestic kitchen tasks filmed from a head-mounted camera. We found a clear vertical visual asymmetry with hands located in the lower visual scene (LVS) in more than 70% of image frames, particularly in ipsilateral space. These findings provide the first direct evidence for the established assumption that hands spend more time in the lower than in the upper visual field (UVF). Further work is required to determine whether this LVF asymmetry differs across the lifespan, in different professions, and in clinical populations.
| S-EPMC10130124 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire has been widely used for nearly 20 years to assess patients with a variety of hand and upper extremity conditions. However, normative data have not previously been collected, limiting interpretation.The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire was administered to 579 participants recruited from the general population. In addition, participants were asked to identify any problem affecting their hand(s), including trauma, hand disease/condition, systemic illness, or nonspecific symptoms. Comorbidities and demographic data were also collected.Total Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire score for healthy individuals was indicative of generally good hand function (95.2; 95 percent CI, 94.3 to 96.1). Individuals with unilateral trauma scored for their affected hand (90.3; 95 percent CI, 87.9 to 92.6) lower than their healthy hand (mean difference, 5.7; 95 percent CI, 3.2 to 8.3). For individuals with and without hand trauma, total Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire score decreased with increasing number of comorbidities. Many of the differences in Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire score between the problem hand and unaffected hand were smaller than the minimal clinically important difference of 3.0 to 23.0 for known abnormalities of the hand and upper extremity.These normative data provide appropriate baseline information for individuals with and without underlying hand conditions. Most notably, these findings suggest that individuals with a unilateral problem establish new subnormative values for both their affected and unaffected hands. These data will encourage an appropriate understanding of the results of future studies using the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire.
| S-EPMC5588690 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9313614 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8095040 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The only treatment for celiac disease (CD) is life-long adherence to a gluten-free diet (GFD). Noncompliance is associated with signs and symptoms of CD, yet long-term adherence rates are poor. It is not known how the burden of the GFD compares with other medical treatments, and there are limited data on the socioeconomic factors influencing treatment adherence. In this study, we compared treatment burden and health state in CD compared with other chronic illnesses and evaluated the relationship between treatment burden and adherence.Survey was mailed to participants with CD, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, hypertension (HTN), diabetes mellitus (DM), congestive heart failure, and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on dialysis. Surveys included demographic information and visual analog scales measuring treatment burden, importance of treatment, disease-specific health status, and overall health status.We collected surveys from 341 celiac and 368 non-celiac participants. Celiac participants reported high treatment burden, greater than participants with GERD or HTN and comparable to ESRD. Conversely, patients with CD reported the highest health state of all groups. Factors associated with high treatment burden in CD included poor adherence, concern regarding food cost, eating outside the home, higher income, lack of college education, and time limitations in preparing food. Poor adherence in CD was associated with increased symptoms, income, and low perceived importance of treatment.Participants with CD have high treatment burden but also excellent overall health status in comparison with other chronic medical conditions. The significant burden of dietary therapy for CD argues for the need for safe adjuvant treatment, as well as interventions designed to lower the perceived burden of the GFD.
| S-EPMC4159418 | biostudies-literature