Re: Prevalence and work relatedness of self-reported carpal tunnel syndrome among U.S. workers

✍ Scribed by Peter A. Nathan; Richard C. Keniston; Kenneth D. Meadows; Richard S. Lockwood

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 1996
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 138 KB
• Volume: 30
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0271-3586
• DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199610)30:4<500::aid-ajim17>3.0.co;2-8

✦ Synopsis

present an exhaustive report of data collected in the 1988 NIOSH/BLS survey of self-reported (SR) and medically called (MC) carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) among U.S. recent and nonrecent workers. Unfortunately the limited and subjective nature of the data prevents extrapolation of any meaningful findings. The study lacks an objective case definition of CTS, with categorization of both SR and MC CTS based solely on selfreporting via questionnaire. The authors themselves state that a major limitation of the study was the self-reporting of CTS without medical validation (p 465), which in a clinical setting would include nerve conduction studies.

Though the authors link bendinghwisting of the hands/ wrists with increased prevalence of CTS among certain occupations of recent workers, it is noteworthy that the nonrecent workers (not employed during the previous 12 months) were more likely to self-report CTS than were recent workers (1.78% vs. 1.47%). This was reported to be nonsignificant, but a x2 analysis reveals the difference to be highly significant (G[1 dfl = 19,540.115, p < 0.000001). Further as to risk factors, the authors failed to mention most of the dozens of published studies which have found associations between nonwork factors and CTS [e.