Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2013 Mar 28;2013(3):CD009601.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009601.pub2.

Therapeutic ultrasound for carpal tunnel syndrome

Matthew J Page  1 , Denise O'Connor, Veronica Pitt, Nicola Massy-Westropp
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Therapeutic ultrasound for carpal tunnel syndrome

Matthew J Page et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Therapeutic ultrasound may be offered to people experiencing mild to moderate symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The effectiveness and duration of benefit of this non-surgical intervention remain unclear.

Objectives: To review the effects of therapeutic ultrasound compared with no treatment, placebo or another non-surgical intervention in people with CTS.

Search methods: On 27 November 2012, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (2012, Issue 11 in The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (January 1966 to November 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to November 2012), CINAHL Plus (January 1937 to November 2012), and AMED (January 1985 to November 2012).

Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any regimen of therapeutic ultrasound with no treatment, a placebo or another non-surgical intervention in people with CTS.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We calculated risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for primary and secondary outcomes. We pooled results of clinically homogenous trials in a meta-analysis using a random-effects model, where possible, to provide estimates of the effect.

Main results: We included 11 studies including 414 participants in the review. Two trials compared therapeutic ultrasound with placebo, two compared one ultrasound regimen with another, two compared ultrasound with another non-surgical intervention, and six compared ultrasound as part of a multi-component intervention with another non-surgical intervention (for example, exercises and splint). The risk of bias was low in some studies and unclear or high in other studies, with only two reporting that the allocation sequence was concealed and six reporting that participants were blinded. Overall, there is insufficient evidence that one therapeutic ultrasound regimen is more efficacious than another. Only two studies reported the primary outcome of interest, short-term overall improvement (any measure in which patients indicate the intensity of their complaints compared with baseline, for example, global rating of improvement, satisfaction with treatment, within three months post-treatment). One low quality trial with 68 participants found that when compared with placebo, therapeutic ultrasound may increase the chance of experiencing short-term overall improvement at the end of seven weeks treatment (RR 2.36; 95% CI 1.40 to 3.98), although losses to follow-up and failure to adjust for the correlation between wrists in participants with bilateral CTS in this study suggest that this data should be interpreted with caution. Another low quality trial with 60 participants found that at three months post-treatment therapeutic ultrasound plus splint increased the chance of short-term overall improvement (patient satisfaction) when compared with splint alone (RR 3.02; 95% CI 1.36 to 6.72), but decreased the chance of short-term overall improvement when compared with low-level laser therapy plus splint (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.33), though participants were not blinded to treatment, it was unclear if the random allocation sequence was adequately concealed, and there was a potential unit of analysis error. Differences between groups receiving different frequencies and intensities of ultrasound, and between ultrasound as part of a multi-component intervention versus other non-surgical interventions, were generally small and not statistically significant for symptoms, function, and neurophysiologic parameters. No studies reported any adverse effects of therapeutic ultrasound, but this outcome was only measured in three studies. More adverse effects data are required before any firm conclusions on the safety of therapeutic ultrasound can be made.

Authors' conclusions: There is only poor quality evidence from very limited data to suggest that therapeutic ultrasound may be more effective than placebo for either short- or long-term symptom improvement in people with CTS. There is insufficient evidence to support the greater benefit of one type of therapeutic ultrasound regimen over another or to support the use of therapeutic ultrasound as a treatment with greater efficacy compared to other non-surgical interventions for CTS, such as splinting, exercises, and oral drugs. More methodologically rigorous studies are needed to determine the effectiveness and safety of therapeutic ultrasound for CTS.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 1 Short‐term overall improvement (number of participants with good to excellent improvement) (3 months or less).
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (number of participants with complete remission of subjective symptoms) (3 months or less).
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain score) (2 months or less).
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (pain and/or paraesthesia) (3 months or less).
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (sensory loss) (3 months or less).
1.6
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (nocturnal waking) (3 months or less).
1.7
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 7 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (hand grip strength) (3 months or less).
1.8
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 8 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (pinch strength) (3 months or less).
1.9
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 9 Short‐term improvement in motor distal latency (ms) (3 months or less).
1.10
1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 10 Short‐term improvement in motor nerve conduction velocity (m/s) (3 months or less).
1.11
1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 11 Short‐term improvement in sensory distal latency (ms) (3 months or less).
1.12
1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 12 Short‐term improvement in sensory nerve conduction velocity (3 months or less).
1.13
1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 13 Long‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (>3 months) (number of participants who did not have an overall unsatisfactory outcome).
1.14
1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 14 Long‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (number of participants with complete remission of subjective symptoms) (>3 months).
1.15
1.15. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 15 Long‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (pain and/or paraesthesia) (>3 months).
1.16
1.16. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 16 Long‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (sensory loss) (>3 months).
1.17
1.17. Analysis
Comparison 1 Therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo, Outcome 17 Long‐term improvement in functional ability (grip and pinch strength) (>3 months).
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying frequency), Outcome 1 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (pain) (3 months or less).
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying frequency), Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (paraesthesia) (3 months or less).
2.3
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying frequency), Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (superficial sensation) (3 months or less).
2.4
2.4. Analysis
Comparison 2 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying frequency), Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (Tinel's sign) (3 months or less).
2.5
2.5. Analysis
Comparison 2 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying frequency), Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (Phalen's sign) (3 months or less).
2.6
2.6. Analysis
Comparison 2 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying frequency), Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (3 months or less).
3.1
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus low‐level laser therapy, Outcome 1 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain) (3 months or less).
3.2
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus low‐level laser therapy, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (hand grip strength, N) (3 months or less).
3.3
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus low‐level laser therapy, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (pinch strength, N) (3 months or less).
3.4
3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus low‐level laser therapy, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in motor distal latency (ms) (3 months or less).
3.5
3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus low‐level laser therapy, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude (mV) (3 months or less).
3.6
3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus low‐level laser therapy, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in thumb sensory latency (ms) (3 months or less).
3.7
3.7. Analysis
Comparison 3 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus low‐level laser therapy, Outcome 7 Short‐term improvement in thumb sensory action potential (SAP) amplitude (µV) (3 months or less).
3.8
3.8. Analysis
Comparison 3 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus low‐level laser therapy, Outcome 8 Short‐term improvement in index sensory latency (ms) (3 months or less).
3.9
3.9. Analysis
Comparison 3 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus low‐level laser therapy, Outcome 9 Short‐term improvement in index sensory action potential (SAP) amplitude (µV) (3 months or less).
4.1
4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying intensity), Outcome 1 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain) (3 months or less).
4.2
4.2. Analysis
Comparison 4 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying intensity), Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (night pain / paraesthesia) (3 months or less).
4.3
4.3. Analysis
Comparison 4 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying intensity), Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (nocturnal awakening) (3 months or less).
4.4
4.4. Analysis
Comparison 4 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying intensity), Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in motor distal latency (ms) (3 months or less).
4.5
4.5. Analysis
Comparison 4 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying intensity), Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in motor nerve conduction velocity (m/s) (3 months or less).
4.6
4.6. Analysis
Comparison 4 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying intensity), Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in sensory distal latency (ms) (3 months or less).
4.7
4.7. Analysis
Comparison 4 Therapeutic ultrasound (varying intensity), Outcome 7 Short‐term improvement in sensory nerve conduction velocity (3 months or less).
5.1
5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus local corticosteroid injection plus splint, Outcome 1 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (symptom severity score) (3 months or less).
5.2
5.2. Analysis
Comparison 5 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus local corticosteroid injection plus splint, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain) (3 months or less).
5.3
5.3. Analysis
Comparison 5 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus local corticosteroid injection plus splint, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (functional status score) (3 months or less).
5.4
5.4. Analysis
Comparison 5 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus local corticosteroid injection plus splint, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (grip strength) (3 months or less).
5.5
5.5. Analysis
Comparison 5 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus local corticosteroid injection plus splint, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in median nerve motor distal latency (3 months or less).
5.6
5.6. Analysis
Comparison 5 Therapeutic ultrasound (single intervention) versus local corticosteroid injection plus splint, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in median sensory nerve conduction velocity (3 months or less).
6.1
6.1. Analysis
Comparison 6 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 1 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain) (3 months or less).
6.2
6.2. Analysis
Comparison 6 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (Levine) (3 months or less).
6.3
6.3. Analysis
Comparison 6 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (Phalen sign) (3 months or less).
6.4
6.4. Analysis
Comparison 6 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (Tinel sign) (3 months or less).
6.5
6.5. Analysis
Comparison 6 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (Levine) (3 months or less).
6.6
6.6. Analysis
Comparison 6 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (hand grip strength) (3 months or less).
6.7
6.7. Analysis
Comparison 6 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 7 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (pinch strength) (3 months or less).
6.8
6.8. Analysis
Comparison 6 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 8 Short‐term improvement in motor distal latency (ms) (3 months or less).
6.9
6.9. Analysis
Comparison 6 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 9 Short‐term improvement in sensory distal latency (ms) (3 months or less).
6.10
6.10. Analysis
Comparison 6 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 10 Long‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (>3 months).
7.1
7.1. Analysis
Comparison 7 Therapeutic ultrasound plus exercises plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 1 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain) (3 months or less).
7.2
7.2. Analysis
Comparison 7 Therapeutic ultrasound plus exercises plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (Levine) (3 months or less).
7.3
7.3. Analysis
Comparison 7 Therapeutic ultrasound plus exercises plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (Phalen sign) (3 months or less).
7.4
7.4. Analysis
Comparison 7 Therapeutic ultrasound plus exercises plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (Tinel sign) (3 months or less).
7.5
7.5. Analysis
Comparison 7 Therapeutic ultrasound plus exercises plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (Levine) (3 months or less).
7.6
7.6. Analysis
Comparison 7 Therapeutic ultrasound plus exercises plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (hand grip strength) (3 months or less).
7.7
7.7. Analysis
Comparison 7 Therapeutic ultrasound plus exercises plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 7 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (pinch strength) (3 months or less).
7.8
7.8. Analysis
Comparison 7 Therapeutic ultrasound plus exercises plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 8 Short‐term improvement in motor distal latency (ms) (3 months or less).
7.9
7.9. Analysis
Comparison 7 Therapeutic ultrasound plus exercises plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 9 Short‐term improvement in sensory distal latency (ms) (3 months or less).
7.10
7.10. Analysis
Comparison 7 Therapeutic ultrasound plus exercises plus splint versus exercises plus splint, Outcome 10 Long‐term improvement in CTS symptom (>3 months).
8.1
8.1. Analysis
Comparison 8 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus splint, Outcome 1 Short‐term overall improvement (completely normal hands based on electroneuromyography) (3 months or less).
8.2
8.2. Analysis
Comparison 8 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus splint, Outcome 2 Short‐term overall improvement (patient satisfaction) (3 months or less).
8.3
8.3. Analysis
Comparison 8 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus splint, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (symptom severity score) (3 months or less).
8.4
8.4. Analysis
Comparison 8 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus splint, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain) (3 months or less).
8.5
8.5. Analysis
Comparison 8 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus splint, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (functional status score) (3 months or less).
8.6
8.6. Analysis
Comparison 8 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus splint, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in median nerve motor distal latency (3 months or less).
8.7
8.7. Analysis
Comparison 8 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus splint, Outcome 7 Short‐term improvement in second digit‐wrist median nerve sensory velocity (3 months or less).
9.1
9.1. Analysis
Comparison 9 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus low‐level laser therapy plus splint, Outcome 1 Short‐term overall improvement (completely normal hands based on electroneuromyography) (3 months or less).
9.2
9.2. Analysis
Comparison 9 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus low‐level laser therapy plus splint, Outcome 2 Short‐term overall improvement (patient satisfaction) (3 months or less).
9.3
9.3. Analysis
Comparison 9 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus low‐level laser therapy plus splint, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (symptom severity score) (3 months or less).
9.4
9.4. Analysis
Comparison 9 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus low‐level laser therapy plus splint, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain) (3 months or less).
9.5
9.5. Analysis
Comparison 9 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus low‐level laser therapy plus splint, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (functional status score) (3 months or less).
9.6
9.6. Analysis
Comparison 9 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus low‐level laser therapy plus splint, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in median nerve motor distal latency (3 months or less).
9.7
9.7. Analysis
Comparison 9 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus low‐level laser therapy plus splint, Outcome 7 Short‐term improvement in second digit‐wrist median nerve sensory velocity (3 months or less).
10.1
10.1. Analysis
Comparison 10 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification versus dexamethasone iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 1 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (BCTQ symptom severity score) (3 months or less).
10.2
10.2. Analysis
Comparison 10 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification versus dexamethasone iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain on movement) (3 months or less).
10.3
10.3. Analysis
Comparison 10 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification versus dexamethasone iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain at rest) (3 months or less).
10.4
10.4. Analysis
Comparison 10 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification versus dexamethasone iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain at night) (3 months or less).
10.5
10.5. Analysis
Comparison 10 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification versus dexamethasone iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (BCTQ functional status score) (3 months or less).
10.6
10.6. Analysis
Comparison 10 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification versus dexamethasone iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (Health Assessment Questionnaire) (3 months or less).
11.1
11.1. Analysis
Comparison 11 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercise plus night splint plus activity modification versus placebo iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 1 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (BCTQ symptom severity score) (3 months or less).
11.2
11.2. Analysis
Comparison 11 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercise plus night splint plus activity modification versus placebo iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain on movement) (3 months or less).
11.3
11.3. Analysis
Comparison 11 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercise plus night splint plus activity modification versus placebo iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain at rest) (3 months or less).
11.4
11.4. Analysis
Comparison 11 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercise plus night splint plus activity modification versus placebo iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain at night) (3 months or less).
11.5
11.5. Analysis
Comparison 11 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercise plus night splint plus activity modification versus placebo iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (BCTQ functional status score) (3 months or less).
11.6
11.6. Analysis
Comparison 11 Therapeutic ultrasound plus nerve and tendon gliding exercise plus night splint plus activity modification versus placebo iontophoresis plus nerve and tendon gliding exercises plus night splint plus activity modification, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (Health Assessment Questionnaire) (3 months or less).
12.1
12.1. Analysis
Comparison 12 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus placebo ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 1 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (Tinel's sign) (3 months or less).
12.2
12.2. Analysis
Comparison 12 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus placebo ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (Phalen's sign) (3 months or less).
12.3
12.3. Analysis
Comparison 12 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus placebo ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (symptom severity score) (3 months or less).
12.4
12.4. Analysis
Comparison 12 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus placebo ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (functional status score) (3 months or less).
12.5
12.5. Analysis
Comparison 12 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus placebo ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (grip strength) (3 months or less).
12.6
12.6. Analysis
Comparison 12 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus placebo ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in motor distal latency (3 months or less).
12.7
12.7. Analysis
Comparison 12 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus placebo ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 7 Short‐term improvement in motor nerve conduction velocity (3 months or less).
12.8
12.8. Analysis
Comparison 12 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus placebo ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 8 Short‐term improvement in sensory distal latency (3 months or less).
12.9
12.9. Analysis
Comparison 12 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus placebo ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 9 Short‐term improvement in palm‐wrist conduction velocity (3 months or less).
13.1
13.1. Analysis
Comparison 13 Therapeutic ultrasound plus placebo versus sham ultrasound plus NSAID, Outcome 1 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (pain and/or paraesthesia) (3 months or less).
13.2
13.2. Analysis
Comparison 13 Therapeutic ultrasound plus placebo versus sham ultrasound plus NSAID, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (frequency of awakening) (3 months or less).
13.3
13.3. Analysis
Comparison 13 Therapeutic ultrasound plus placebo versus sham ultrasound plus NSAID, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in median nerve sensory distal latency (3 months or less).
13.4
13.4. Analysis
Comparison 13 Therapeutic ultrasound plus placebo versus sham ultrasound plus NSAID, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) (endpoint) (3 months or less).
13.5
13.5. Analysis
Comparison 13 Therapeutic ultrasound plus placebo versus sham ultrasound plus NSAID, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) (change from baseline) (3 months or less).
13.6
13.6. Analysis
Comparison 13 Therapeutic ultrasound plus placebo versus sham ultrasound plus NSAID, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in median nerve motor distal latency (change from baseline) (3 months or less).
13.7
13.7. Analysis
Comparison 13 Therapeutic ultrasound plus placebo versus sham ultrasound plus NSAID, Outcome 7 Short‐term improvement in compound muscle action potential (CMAP) (endpoint) (3 months or less).
13.8
13.8. Analysis
Comparison 13 Therapeutic ultrasound plus placebo versus sham ultrasound plus NSAID, Outcome 8 Short‐term improvement in compound muscle action potential (CMAP) (change from baseline) (3 months or less).
13.9
13.9. Analysis
Comparison 13 Therapeutic ultrasound plus placebo versus sham ultrasound plus NSAID, Outcome 9 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain) (3 months or less).
14.1
14.1. Analysis
Comparison 14 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus sham ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 1 Adverse events.
14.2
14.2. Analysis
Comparison 14 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus sham ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain) (3 months or less).
14.3
14.3. Analysis
Comparison 14 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus sham ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (symptom severity score) (3 months or less).
14.4
14.4. Analysis
Comparison 14 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus sham ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (functional status score) (3 months or less).
14.5
14.5. Analysis
Comparison 14 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus sham ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in median nerve motor distal latency (3 months or less).
14.6
14.6. Analysis
Comparison 14 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus sham ultrasound plus splint, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in median nerve sensory distal latency (3 months or less).
15.1
15.1. Analysis
Comparison 15 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus therapeutic ultrasound plus splint plus ketoprofen phonophoresis, Outcome 1 Adverse events.
15.2
15.2. Analysis
Comparison 15 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus therapeutic ultrasound plus splint plus ketoprofen phonophoresis, Outcome 2 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (VAS pain) (3 months or less).
15.3
15.3. Analysis
Comparison 15 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus therapeutic ultrasound plus splint plus ketoprofen phonophoresis, Outcome 3 Short‐term improvement in CTS symptoms (symptom severity score) (3 months or less).
15.4
15.4. Analysis
Comparison 15 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus therapeutic ultrasound plus splint plus ketoprofen phonophoresis, Outcome 4 Short‐term improvement in functional ability (functional status score) (3 months or less).
15.5
15.5. Analysis
Comparison 15 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus therapeutic ultrasound plus splint plus ketoprofen phonophoresis, Outcome 5 Short‐term improvement in median nerve motor distal latency (3 months or less).
15.6
15.6. Analysis
Comparison 15 Therapeutic ultrasound plus splint versus therapeutic ultrasound plus splint plus ketoprofen phonophoresis, Outcome 6 Short‐term improvement in median nerve sensory distal latency (3 months or less).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

References

References to studies included in this review

Bakhtiary 2004 {published data only}
    1. Bakhtiary AH, Rashidy‐Pour A. Ultrasound and laser therapy in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Australian Journal of Physiotherapy 2004;50:147‐51. [PUBMED: 15482245] - PubMed
Baysal 2006 {published data only}
    1. Baysal O, Altay Z, Ozcan C, Ertem K, Yologlu S, Kayhan A. Comparison of three conservative treatment protocols in carpal tunnel syndrome. International Journal of Clinical Practice 2006;60(7):820‐8. [PUBMED: 16704676] - PubMed
Bilgici 2010 {published data only}
    1. Biligici A, Ulusoy H, Canturk F. The comparison of ultrasound treatment and local steroid injection plus splinting in the carpal tunnel syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. Bratislavske Lekarske Listy 2010;111(12):659‐65. [PUBMED: 21384736] - PubMed
Dincer 2009 {published data only}
    1. Dincer U, Cakar E, Kiralp MZ, Kilac H, Dursun H. The effectiveness of conservative treatments of carpal tunnel syndrome: splinting, ultrasound, and low‐level laser therapies. Photomedicine and Laser Surgery 2009;27(1):119‐25. [PUBMED: 19196106] - PubMed
Duymaz 2012 {published data only}
    1. Duymaz T, Sindel D, Kesiktaş N, Müslümanoğlu L. Efficacy of some combined conservative methods in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a randomized controlled clinical and electrophysiological trial. Turkish Journal of Rheumatology 2012;27(1):38‐46.
Ebenbichler 1998 {published data only}
    1. Ebenbichler GR, Resch KL, Nicolakis P, Wiesinger GF, Uhl F, Ghanem A, et al. Ultrasound treatment for treating the carpal tunnel syndrome: randomised 'sham' controlled trial. BMJ 1998;316(7133):731‐5. [PUBMED: 9529407] - PMC - PubMed
Ekim 2008 {published data only}
    1. Ekim A, Colak E. Ultrasound treatment in carpal tunnel syndrome: a placebo controlled study. Turkiye Fiziksel Tip ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi 2008;54(3):96‐101. [EMBASE: 2008610958]
Koyuncu 1995 {published data only}
    1. Koyuncu H, Unver FN, Sahin U, Togay P. 1MHz ‐ 3MHz ultrasound applications in carpal tunnel syndrome [Karpal tunel sendromunda 1MHz ‐ 3MHz ultrason uygulamasi]. Fizik Tedavi ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi 1995;19:141‐5. [EMBASE: 1995350540]
Oztas 1998 {published data only}
    1. Oztas O, Turan B, Bora I, Karakaya MK. Ultrasound therapy effect in carpal tunnel syndrome. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 1998;79(12):1540‐4. [PUBMED: 9862296] - PubMed
Piravej 2004 {published data only}
    1. Piravej K, Boonhong J. Effect of ultrasound thermotherapy in mild to moderate carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand 2004;87(Suppl 2):S100‐6. [PUBMED: 16083171] - PubMed
Yildiz 2011 {published data only}
    1. Yildiz N, Atalay NS, Gungen GO, Sanal E, Akkaya N, Topuz O. Comparison of ultrasound and ketoprofen phonophoresis in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation 2011;24(1):39‐47. [PUBMED: 21248399] - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Avci 2004 {published data only}
    1. Avci S, Günaydin R, Öztura I. Comparison of effectiveness of splint and splint with physical therapy in carpal tunnel syndrome [Karpal tunel sendromunda atel ve atel ile birlikte fizik tedavinin etkinliginin karsilastirilmasi]. Ftr Turkiye Fiziksel Tip Ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi 2004;50(2):22‐6.
Bakhtiary 2011 {published data only}
    1. Bakhtiary AH, Fatemi E, Emami M, Malek M. Comparing the effects of iontophoresis and phonophoresis of dexamethasone on the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Koomesh 2011;13(1):83‐93.
Coskun 2011 {published data only}
    1. Coskun G, Kirdi N, Can F. Effects of wrist traction on pain and hand function in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome [Karpal tünel sendromunun tedavisinde bilek traksiyonunun ağrı ve elin fonksiyonelliği üzerine etkisi]. Fizyoterapi Rehabilitasyon 2011;22(1):3‐10.
Dakowicz 2005 {published data only}
    1. Dakowicz A, Latosiewicz R. The value of iontophoresis combined with ultrasound in patients with the carpal tunnel syndrome. Roczniki Akademii Medycznej w Bialymstoku 2005;50(Suppl 1):196‐8. [PUBMED: 16119664] - PubMed
Davis 1998 {published data only}
    1. Davis PT, Hulbert JR, Kassak KM, Meyer JJ. Comparative efficacy of conservative medical and chiropractic treatments for carpal tunnel syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics 1998;21(5):317‐26. [PUBMED: 9627862] - PubMed
Deliss 1998 {published data only}
    1. Deliss L. Ultrasound treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome: emphasis must be on return of sensation and function. BMJ 1998;317(7158):601. [PUBMED: 9721127] - PMC - PubMed
Gurcay 2012 {published data only}
    1. Gurcay E, Unlu E, Gurcay AG, Tuncay R, Cakci A. Assessment of phonophoresis and iontophoresis in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. Rheumatology International 2012;32(3):717‐22. - PubMed
Hui 2004 {published data only}
    1. Hui ACF, Wong SM, Tang A, Mok V, Hung LK, Wong KS. Long‐term outcome of carpal tunnel syndrome after conservative treatment. International Journal of Clinical Practice 2004;58(4):337‐9. [PUBMED: 15161116] - PubMed
Jarvik 2009 {published data only}
    1. Jarvik JG, Comstock BA, Kliot M, Turner JA, Chan L, Heagerty PJ, et al. Surgery versus non‐surgical therapy for carpal tunnel syndrome: a randomised parallel‐group trial. Lancet 2009;374(9695):1074‐81. [PUBMED: 19782873] - PubMed
Lucas 2002 {published data only}
    1. Lucas N. A critical appraisal of an article examining the efficacy of ultrasound treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Osteopathic Medicine 2002;5(1):28‐30.
Robertson 2001 {published data only}
    1. Robertson VJ, Baker KG. A review of therapeutic ultrasound: effectiveness studies. Physical Therapy 2001;81(7):1339‐50. [PUBMED: 11444997] - PubMed
Sucher 1999 {published data only}
    1. Sucher BM. Ultrasound therapy effect in carpal tunnel syndrome. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 1999;80(9):1117. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Taspinar 2007 {published data only}
    1. Taspinar S, Sahin F, Ercalik C, Kuran B, Barkut K, Celik M, et al. Comparison of the efficacy of corticosteroid injection, night splint and physiotherapy in diabetic corpal tunnel syndrome. Turkiye Fiziksel Tip ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi 2007;53(2):54‐60.
Toro 1997 {published data only}
    1. Toro JR, Rodriguez IG, Espinel JP, Caballero MLG, Rodriquez FA. Chronic idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome: effectiveness of iontophoresis‐corticoid treatment compared with iontophoresis‐placebo (galvanization). Rehabilitacion 1997;31(2):118‐26.
Walling 1998 {published data only}
    1. Walling AD. Effects of ultrasound treatment in carpal tunnel syndrome. American Family Physician 1998;58(4):961‐2.

References to ongoing studies

NCT01590745 {published data only}
    1. NCT01590745. Ultrasound Therapy for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS). http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01590745.

Additional references

Ashworth 2010
    1. Ashworth N. Carpal tunnel syndrome. Clinical Evidence 2010;03:1114. [PUBMED: 21718565] - PMC - PubMed
Atroshi 1999
    1. Atroshi I, Gummesson C, Johnsson R, Ornstein E, Ranstam J, Rosén I. Prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in a general population. JAMA 1999;282(2):153‐8. [PUBMED: 10411196] - PubMed
Binder 1985
    1. Binder A, Hodge G, Greenwood AM, Hazleman BL, Page Thomas DP. Is therapeutic ultrasound effective in treating soft tissue lesions?. British Medical Journal 1985;290(6467):512‐4. [PUBMED: 3918652] - PMC - PubMed
Bland 2005
    1. Bland JD. The relationship of obesity, age, and carpal tunnel syndrome: more complex than was thought?. Muscle & Nerve 2005;32(4):527‐32. - PubMed
Charles 2009
    1. Charles J, Fahridin S, Britt H. Carpal tunnel syndrome. Australian Family Physician 2009;38(9):665. [PUBMED: 19893791] - PubMed
Deeks 2011
    1. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG. Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011:Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Dwan 2011
    1. Dwan K, Altman DG, Cresswell L, Blundell M, Gamble CL, Williamson PR. Comparison of protocols and registry entries to published reports for randomised controlled trials. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000031.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Gelfman 2009
    1. Gelfman R, Melton LJ 3rd, Yawn BP, Wollan PC, Amadio PC, Stevens JC. Long‐term trends in carpal tunnel syndrome. Neurology 2009;72(1):33‐41. [PUBMED: 19122028] - PMC - PubMed
Gerritsen 2002
    1. Gerritsen AAM, Krom MCTFM, Struijs MA, Scholten RJPM, Vet HCW, Bouter LM. Conservative treatment options for carpal tunnel syndrome: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Journal of Neurology 2002;249(3):272‐80. [PUBMED: 11993525] - PubMed
Goodyear‐Smith 2004
    1. Goodyear‐Smith F, Arroll B. What can family physicians offer patients with carpal tunnel syndrome other than surgery? A systematic review of nonsurgical management. Annals of Family Medicine 2004;2(3):267‐73. - PMC - PubMed
Higgins 2002
    1. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in meta‐analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2002;21(11):1539‐58. [PUBMED: 12111919] - PubMed
Higgins 2011a
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [Updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Higgins 2011b
    1. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC. Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011:Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Higgins 2011c
    1. Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Special topics in statistics. In: Higgins JPT, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011:Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Hong 1988
    1. Hong CZ, Liu HH, Yu LJ. Ultrasound thermotherapy effect on the recovery of nerve conduction in experimental compression neuropathy. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1988;69:410‐4. - PubMed
Hopewell 2007
    1. Hopewell S, McDonald S, Clarke MJ, Egger M. Grey literature in meta‐analyses of randomised trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000010.pub3; PUBMED: 17443631] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Huisstede 2010
    1. Huisstede BM, Hoogvliet P, Randsdorp MS, Glerum S, Middelkoop M, Koes BW. Carpal tunnel syndrome. Part 1: Effectiveness of nonsurgical treatments ‐ a systematic review. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2010;91(7):981‐1004. [PUBMED: 20599038] - PubMed
Keith 2009
    1. Keith MW, Masear V, Chung K, Maupin K, Andary M, Amadio PC, et al. Diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 2009;17(6):389‐96. [PUBMED: 19474448] - PMC - PubMed
Kerwin 1996
    1. Kerwin G, Williams CS, Seiler JG 3rd. The pathophysiology of carpal tunnel syndrome. Hand Clinics 1996;12(2):243‐51. [PUBMED: 8724576] - PubMed
Kirkham 2010
    1. Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG, Gamble C, Dodd S, Smyth R, et al. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ 2010;340:c365. - PubMed
Lehmann 1974
    1. Lehmann JF, Warren CG, Scham SM. Therapeutic heat and cold. Clinical Orthopaedics 1974;99:207‐45. [PUBMED: 4133064] - PubMed
Levine 1993
    1. Levine DW, Simmons BP, Koris MJ, Daltroy LH, Hohl GG, Fossel AH, et al. A self‐administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 1993;75(11):1585‐92. [PUBMED: 8245050] - PubMed
Marshall 2007
    1. Marshall SC, Tardif G, Ashworth NL. Local corticosteroid injection for carpal tunnel syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001554.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Muller 2004
    1. Muller M, Tsui D, Schnurr R, Biddulph‐Deisroth L, Hard J, MacDermid JC. Effectiveness of hand therapy interventions in primary management of carpal tunnel syndrome: a systematic review. Journal of Hand Therapy 2004;17(2):210‐28. [PUBMED: 15162107] - PubMed
O'Connor 2012
    1. O'Connor D, Page MJ, Massy‐Westropp N. Ergonomic positioning or equipment for treating carpal tunnel syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 1. [Art. No: CD009600; DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009600] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Ono 2010
    1. Ono S, Clapham PJ, Chung KC. Optimal management of carpal tunnel syndrome. International Journal of General Medicine 2010;3:255‐61. [PUBMED: 20830201] - PMC - PubMed
Page 2012b
    1. Page MJ, O’Connor D, Pitt V, Massy‐Westropp N. Exercise and mobilisation interventions for carpal tunnel syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 6. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009899] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Page 2012c
    1. Page MJ, Massy‐Westropp N, O'Connor D, Pitt V. Splinting for carpal tunnel syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 7. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010003] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Piazzini 2007
    1. Piazzini DB, Aprile I, Ferrera PE, Bertolini C, Tonali P, Maggi L, et al. A systematic review of conservative treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Clinical Rehabilitation 2007;21(4):299‐314. [PUBMED: 17613571] - PubMed
Rempel 1998
    1. Rempel D, Evanoff B, Amadio PC, Krom M, Franklin G, Franzblau A, et al. Consensus criteria for the classification of carpal tunnel syndrome in epidemiologic studies. American Journal of Public Health 1998;88(10):1447‐51. [PUBMED: 9772842] - PMC - PubMed
Rutjes 2010
    1. Rutjes AWS, Nuesch E, Sterchi R, Juni P. Therapeutic ultrasound for osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003132.pub2; PUBMED: PMID:20091539] - DOI - PubMed
Savović 2012
    1. Savović J, Jones HE, Altman DG, Harris RJ, Jüni P, Pildal J, et al. Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials. Annals of Internal Medicine 2012;157(6):429‐38. - PubMed
Scholten 2007
    1. Scholten RJPM, Mink van der Molen A, Uitdehaag BMJ, Bouter LM, Vet HCW. Surgical treatment options for carpal tunnel syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003905.pub3; PUBMED: 17943805] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Stallings 1997
    1. Stallings SP, Kasdan ML, Soergel TM, Corwin HM. A case‐control study of obesity as a risk factor for carpal tunnel syndrome in a population of 600 patients presenting for independent medical examination. The Journal of Hand Surgery 1997;22(2):211‐5. - PubMed
Sterne 2011
    1. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Moher D. Addressing reporting biases. In: Higgins JPT, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011:Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Szabo 1992
    1. Szabo RM, Madison M. Carpal tunnel syndrome. Orthopedic Clinics of North America 1992;23(1):103‐9. [PUBMED: 1729659] - PubMed
Szabo 1994
    1. Szabo RM, Steinberg DR. Nerve entrapment syndromes in the wrist. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons 1994;2(2):115‐23. [PUBMED: 10708999] - PubMed
Van den Bekerom 2011
    1. Bekerom MP, Windt DA, ter Riet G, Heijden GJ, Bouter LM. Therapeutic ultrasound for acute ankle sprains. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 6. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001250.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Verdugo 2008
    1. Verdugo RJ, Salinas RS, Castillo J, Cea JG. Surgical versus non‐surgical treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001552.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Watson 2008
    1. Watson T, Young, SR. Therapeutic ultrasound. In: Watson T editor(s). Electrotherapy: evidence‐based practice. 12. Edinburgh; New York: Churchill Livingstone, 2008.
Werner 1994
    1. Werner RA, Albers JW, Franzblau A, Armstrong TJ. The relationship between body mass index and the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle & Nerve 1994;17(6):632‐6. - PubMed
Wong 2011
    1. Wong SM, Hui ACF, Tang A, Ho PC, Hung LK, Wond KS, et al. Local vs systemic corticosteroids in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Neurology 2001;56(11):1565‐7. - PubMed
Young 2002
    1. Young S. Ultrasound therapy. In: Kitchen S editor(s). Electrotherapy: Evidence‐Based Practice. 11th Edition. Churchill Livingstone, 2002:221‐230.

References to other published versions of this review

O'Connor 2003
    1. O'Connor D, Marshall S, Massy‐Westropp N. Non‐surgical treatment (other than steroid injection) for carpal tunnel syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003219] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Page 2012a
    1. Page MJ, O'Connor D, Pitt V, Massy‐Westropp N. Therapeutic ultrasound for carpal tunnel syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009601] - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms