Outcome Measures after Peripheral Nerve Injury: Past, Present and Future.

Abstract

Peripheral nerve injuries (PNI) present substantial challenges due to variability in injury severity and limited regenerative capabilities. Historically, PNI research has focussed on measures such as subjective surgeon outcome grading, two-point discrimination (2PD) and the Medical Research Council (MRC) grading system. While these methods have use, there are also limitations related to subjectivity and sensitivity. Electrophysiological studies, including electromyography (EMG) and nerve conduction studies (NCS), provide detailed insights but are invasive and resource intensive. Currently, the landscape of outcome measurements in PNI research is diverse, incorporating a mix of surgeon-scored, patient-reported and objective measures. Advancements in wearable devices and motion-tracking technologies offer the potential for continuous, real-time monitoring of patient recovery. These innovations can provide a more comprehensive and objective view of functional recovery, moving beyond the limitations of periodic clinical assessments. The primary limitation in current PNI research is the lack of standardisation in outcome measures and the arbitrary timing of assessments. This variability complicates data interpretation and comparative effectiveness research. Standardising the selection and timing of outcome measures is crucial for enhancing the reliability of research findings and facilitating collaborative studies. Level of Evidence: Level V (Diagnostic).