Locognosia, the ability to localise touch, is one aspect of tactile spatial discrimination which relies on the integrity of peripheral end-organs as well as the somatosensory representation of the surface of the body in the brain. The test presented here is a standardised assessment which uses a protocol for testing locognosia in the zones of the hand supplied by the median and/or ulnar nerves. The test-retest reliability and discriminant validity were investigated in 39 patients with injuries to the median or ulnar nerve.
We have developed an illustrated questionnaire, the Hand20, comprising 20 short and easy-to-understand questions to assess disorders of the upper limb. We have examined the usefulness of this questionnaire by comparing reliability, validity, responsiveness and the level of missing data with those of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. A series of 431 patients with disorders of the upper limb completed the Hand20 and the Japanese version of the DASH (DASH-JSSH) questionnaire. The norms for Hand20 scores were determined in another cross-sectional study. Most patients had no difficulty in completing the Hand20 questionnaire, whereas the DASH-JSSH had a significantly higher rate of missing data. The standard score for the Hand20 was smaller than the reported norms for the DASH. Our study showed that the Hand20 questionnaire provided validation comparable with that of the DASH-JSSH. Explanatory illustrations and short questions which were easy-to-understand led to better rates of response and fewer missing data, even in elderly individuals with cognitive deterioration.
Our aim was to determine the clinical value of MRI and CT arthrography in predicting the presence of loose bodies in the elbow. A series of 26 patients with mechanical symptoms in the elbow had plain radiography, MRI and CT arthrography, followed by routine arthroscopy of the elbow. The location and number of loose bodies determined by MRI and CT arthrography were recorded. Pre-operative plain radiography, MRI and CT arthrography were compared with arthroscopy. Both MRI and CT arthrography had excellent sensitivity (92% to 100%) but low to moderate specificity (15% to 77%) in identifying posteriorly-based loose bodies. Neither MRI nor CT arthrography was consistently sensitive (46% to 91%) or specific (13% to 73%) in predicting the presence or absence of loose bodies anteriorly. The overall sensitivity for the detection of loose bodies in either compartment was 88% to 100% and the specificity 20% to 70%. Pre-operative radiography had a similar sensitivity and specificity of 84% and 71%, respectively. Our results suggest that neither CT arthrography nor MRI is reliable or accurate enough to be any more effective than plain radiography alone in patients presenting with mechanical symptoms in the elbow.
This study identified variables which influence the outcome of surgical management on 126 ununited scaphoid fractures managed by internal fixation and non-vascular bone grafting. The site of fracture was defined by a new method: the ratio of the length of the proximal fragment to the sum of the lengths of both fragments, calculated using specific views in the plain radiographs. Bone healing occurred in 71% (89) of cases. Only the site of nonunion (p = 1 × 10−6) and the delay to surgery (p = 0.001) remained significant on multivariate analysis. The effect of surgical delay on the probability of union increased as the fracture site moved proximally. A prediction model was produced by stepwise logistic regression analysis, enabling the surgeon to predict the success of surgery where the site of the nonunion and delay to surgery is known.
We developed a questionnaire to assess patient-reported outcome after surgery of the elbow from interviews with patients. Initially, 17 possible items with five response options were included. A prospective study of 104 patients (107 elbow operations) was carried out to analyse the underlying factor structure, dimensionality, internal and test-retest reliability, construct validity and responsiveness of the questionnaire items. This was compared with the Mayo Elbow performance score clinical scale, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, and the Short-Form (SF-36) General Health Survey. In total, five questions were considered inappropriate, which resulted in the final 12-item questionnaire, which has been referred to as the Oxford elbow score. This comprises three unidimensional domains, ‘elbow function’, ‘pain’ and ‘social-psychological’; with each domain comprising four items with good measurement properties. This new 12-item Oxford elbow score is a valid measure of the outcome of surgery of the elbow.
