Objectives: To summarize and critically appraise the body of evidence on conservative management of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: We conducted a literature search from inception to November 2021 in the following databases: Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Google Scholar, PEDRO, and Psychinfo. Two independent reviewers conducted risk of bias and quality assessment. Qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis were the methods for summarizing the findings of the RCTs. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the overall quality and certainty of the evidence on each treatment outcome. Result: Through a database search, 751 records were found, and 33 RCTs were eligible for inclusion. Studies were published between 1995 and 2021. The overall risk of bias for 2 studies was low, 8 studies were unclear, and 23 studies were high. Low-quality evidence suggests that mirror therapy (as an addition to conventional stroke rehabilitation interventions) and graded motor imagery program (compared with routine rehabilitation interventions) may result in a large improvement in pain and disability up to 6-month follow-up in poststroke CRPS-1 patients. Low-quality evidence suggests that pain exposure therapy and aerobic exercises as an additive treatment to physical therapy interventions may result in a large improvement in pain up to a 6-month follow-up. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of all other targeted interventions over conventional physical therapy or sham treatments on pain and disability. Discussion: There is an ongoing need for high-quality studies to inform conservative management choices in CRPS.

Place and hold achieves greater motion than controlled passive mobilization after a two-strand repair for zone 2 flexor tendon repairs.

No abstract

Background Any loss or deviation in body function and structure is considered impairment, whereas limitations on activities are fundamental to the definition of disability. Although it seems intuitive that the two should be closely related, this might not be the case; there is some evidence that psychosocial factors are more important determinants of disability than are objective impairments. However, the degree to which this is the case has been incompletely explored.Questions/purposes The purpose of this study was to determine if disability (as measured by the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] and the Michigan Hand Questionnaire [MHQ]) and pain intensity correlate with impairment (as measured by the American Medical Association [AMA] impairment guide). Secondary study questions addressed the effect of pain intensity and symptom of depression on predicting disability. Methods Impairment and disability were evaluated in a sample of 107 hand-injured patients a mean of 11 months after injury. Impairment rating was performed prospectively. From the patients who came for therapy, they were invited to fill out the questionnaire and evaluated for impairment rating. Response variables of DASH, MHQ, and visual analog scale pain intensity values were collected at the same setting. Other explanatory variables included demographic, injury-related, and psychological factors (symptoms of depression measured with the Beck Depression Inventory). Initial bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine correlations of disability and pain to impairment rating and other exploratory variables.Each author certifies that he or she, or a member of his or her immediate family, has no funding or commercial associations (eg, consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1 editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request. Each author certifies that his or her institution approved the human protocol for this investigation, that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research, and that informed consent for participation in the study was obtained. 123 Clin Orthop Relat Res (2015) 473:3470-3476 DOI 10.1007/s11999-015-4228-7 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ® A Publication of The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons®Results Disability as measured by the DASH showed intermediate correlation with AMA impairment (r = 0 .38, beta = 0.36, p = 0.000). Together with gender, it accounted for only 22% of the variability in DASH scores. Similarly, MHQ score correlated with impairment rating (r = À0.24, beta = À0.23, p \ 0.05). However, together with age, injured hand accounted for only 19% of the variability in MHQ scores. However, pain intensity did not correlate with impairment (r = À0.46, p [ 0.05). Interestingly...

No abstract

No abstract

The objective of the study is to provide information about non disease specified outcome measures which evaluate disability in patients who have impairments in hand and upper extremity and to find the extent to which they are evaluating "disability" based on ICF hand Core Set (activity limitation and participation restriction). MEDLINE, CINAHL, GOOGLE SCHOLAR , OVID and SCIENCE DIRECT databases were systematically searched for studies on non disease specified outcome measures used to evaluate upper extremity function; only studies written in English were considered. We reviewed titles and abstracts of the identified studies to determine whether the studies met predefined eligibility criteria (eg, non disease specified out come measures used in hand injured patients). All the outcome measures which had eligibility included. After full text review ,7 non disease specified outcome measures in hand were identified. Studies were extracted, and the information retrieved from them. All the outcome measures which had incuded, were linked with ICF hand core set disability part (activity and participation). All of them only linked to 16 (42 %) components of ICF hand Core Set, which were most activity and less participation from ICF. None of the non disease specified out come measures in hand injuries cover all domains of disability from the ICF Hand Core Set.

No abstract