腕管综合征与 "双重挤压 "假说:综述及对整脊疗法的启示。

Brent S Russell
{"title":"腕管综合征与 \"双重挤压 \"假说:综述及对整脊疗法的启示。","authors":"Brent S Russell","doi":"10.1186/1746-1340-16-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Upton and McComas claimed that most patients with carpal tunnel syndrome not only have compressive lesions at the wrist, but also show evidence of damage to cervical nerve roots. This \"double crush\" hypothesis has gained some popularity among chiropractors because it seems to provide a rationale for adjusting the cervical spine in treating carpal tunnel syndrome. Here I examine use of the concept by chiropractors, summarize findings from the literature, and critique several studies aimed at supporting or refuting the hypothesis. Although the hypothesis also has been applied to nerve compressions other than those leading to carpal tunnel syndrome, this discussion mainly examines the original application - \"double crush\" involving both cervical spinal nerve roots and the carpal tunnel. I consider several categories: experiments to create double crush syndrome in animals, case reports, literature reviews, and alternatives to the original hypothesis. A significant percentage of patients with carpal tunnel syndrome also have neck pain or cervical nerve root compression, but the relationship has not been definitively explained. The original hypothesis remains controversial and is probably not valid, at least for sensory disturbances, in carpal tunnel syndrome. However, even if the original hypothesis is importantly flawed, evaluation of multiple sites still may be valuable. The chiropractic profession should develop theoretical models to relate cervical dysfunction to carpal tunnel syndrome, and might incorporate some alternatives to the original hypothesis. I intend this review as a starting point for practitioners, educators, and students wishing to advance chiropractic concepts in this area.</p>","PeriodicalId":87173,"journal":{"name":"Chiropractic & osteopathy","volume":"16 ","pages":"2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2365954/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Carpal tunnel syndrome and the \\\"double crush\\\" hypothesis: a review and implications for chiropractic.\",\"authors\":\"Brent S Russell\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/1746-1340-16-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Upton and McComas claimed that most patients with carpal tunnel syndrome not only have compressive lesions at the wrist, but also show evidence of damage to cervical nerve roots. This \\\"double crush\\\" hypothesis has gained some popularity among chiropractors because it seems to provide a rationale for adjusting the cervical spine in treating carpal tunnel syndrome. Here I examine use of the concept by chiropractors, summarize findings from the literature, and critique several studies aimed at supporting or refuting the hypothesis. Although the hypothesis also has been applied to nerve compressions other than those leading to carpal tunnel syndrome, this discussion mainly examines the original application - \\\"double crush\\\" involving both cervical spinal nerve roots and the carpal tunnel. I consider several categories: experiments to create double crush syndrome in animals, case reports, literature reviews, and alternatives to the original hypothesis. A significant percentage of patients with carpal tunnel syndrome also have neck pain or cervical nerve root compression, but the relationship has not been definitively explained. The original hypothesis remains controversial and is probably not valid, at least for sensory disturbances, in carpal tunnel syndrome. However, even if the original hypothesis is importantly flawed, evaluation of multiple sites still may be valuable. The chiropractic profession should develop theoretical models to relate cervical dysfunction to carpal tunnel syndrome, and might incorporate some alternatives to the original hypothesis. I intend this review as a starting point for practitioners, educators, and students wishing to advance chiropractic concepts in this area.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chiropractic & osteopathy\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"2\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-04-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2365954/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chiropractic & osteopathy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-1340-16-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chiropractic & osteopathy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-1340-16-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

厄普顿和麦科马斯声称,大多数腕管综合征患者不仅有腕部压迫性病变,而且还有颈神经根受损的证据。这种 "双重压迫 "假说在脊骨神经科医生中颇受欢迎,因为它似乎为治疗腕管综合征时调整颈椎提供了理论依据。在此,我将探讨脊骨神经科医生对这一概念的使用,总结文献研究结果,并对几项旨在支持或反驳该假说的研究进行点评。尽管该假说也被应用于导致腕管综合征的神经压迫以外的其他神经压迫,但本讨论主要研究其最初的应用--涉及颈椎神经根和腕管的 "双重压迫"。我考虑了几类问题:在动物身上制造双重挤压综合征的实验、病例报告、文献综述以及原始假说的替代方案。在腕管综合征患者中,有相当一部分人同时伴有颈部疼痛或颈神经根压迫症状,但这种关系尚未得到明确解释。最初的假说仍存在争议,至少在腕管综合征的感觉障碍方面可能是无效的。然而,即使最初的假说存在重大缺陷,对多个部位进行评估仍可能是有价值的。脊骨神经科学专业应建立理论模型,将颈椎功能障碍与腕管综合征联系起来,并可能纳入一些替代原假设的方法。我希望这篇综述能成为从业者、教育者和学生在这一领域推进脊骨神经科学理念的起点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Carpal tunnel syndrome and the "double crush" hypothesis: a review and implications for chiropractic.

Carpal tunnel syndrome and the "double crush" hypothesis: a review and implications for chiropractic.

Upton and McComas claimed that most patients with carpal tunnel syndrome not only have compressive lesions at the wrist, but also show evidence of damage to cervical nerve roots. This "double crush" hypothesis has gained some popularity among chiropractors because it seems to provide a rationale for adjusting the cervical spine in treating carpal tunnel syndrome. Here I examine use of the concept by chiropractors, summarize findings from the literature, and critique several studies aimed at supporting or refuting the hypothesis. Although the hypothesis also has been applied to nerve compressions other than those leading to carpal tunnel syndrome, this discussion mainly examines the original application - "double crush" involving both cervical spinal nerve roots and the carpal tunnel. I consider several categories: experiments to create double crush syndrome in animals, case reports, literature reviews, and alternatives to the original hypothesis. A significant percentage of patients with carpal tunnel syndrome also have neck pain or cervical nerve root compression, but the relationship has not been definitively explained. The original hypothesis remains controversial and is probably not valid, at least for sensory disturbances, in carpal tunnel syndrome. However, even if the original hypothesis is importantly flawed, evaluation of multiple sites still may be valuable. The chiropractic profession should develop theoretical models to relate cervical dysfunction to carpal tunnel syndrome, and might incorporate some alternatives to the original hypothesis. I intend this review as a starting point for practitioners, educators, and students wishing to advance chiropractic concepts in this area.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信