Back to Search Start Over

Variation in Use of Electrodiagnostic Testing: Analysis From the Michigan Collaborative Hand Initiative for Quality in Surgery

Authors :
Eric R. Wagner
Zhongyu John Li
Ryan D. Katz
Sandra V. Kotsis
Aviram M. Giladi
R. Glenn Gaston
Michael B. Gottschalk
Kevin C. Chung
Marco Rizzo
John R. Fowler
Joshua M. Adkinson
Jessica I. Billig
Warren C. Hammert
Source :
The Journal of Hand Surgery. 46:169-177
Publication Year :
2021
Publisher :
Elsevier BV, 2021.

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate factors that predict the use of electrodiagnostic testing (EDS) for patients undergoing carpal tunnel release (CTR). Methods In this cohort study, we analyzed 553 patients who underwent primary CTR from 8 practices between July 1, 2019 and December 1, 2019 by 32 surgeons in the Michigan Collaborative Hand Initiative for Quality in Surgery (M-CHIQS). The M-CHIQS is a collaborative initiative aimed at improving quality in hand surgery. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected, including the 6-item carpal tunnel symptoms scale (CTS-6) scores and EDS timing. Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess practice and surgeon variation in EDS use related to clinical diagnostic criteria. Results Of the 553 patients who underwent CTR during the study period, 461 (83.3%) received preoperative EDS. After controlling for patient clinical and demographic characteristics, CTS-6 scores were not associated with receiving any preoperative EDS (lower probability of CTS: odds ratio [OR], 0.94; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.59–1.51), preconsultation EDS (low probability of CTS: OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.73–1.38), or postconsultation EDS (low probability of CTS, OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.77–1.60). For use of any EDS, 9.3% of the variation in testing was explained at the practice level and 31.1% of the variation in testing was explained at the surgeon level. Conclusions Variation in EDS use is explained primarily at the practice and surgeon levels and is not related to patient clinical criteria. We recommend that providers and practices assess their use of preoperative EDS and limit its use to patients with an unclear clinical CTS diagnosis, as stated in current clinical practice guidelines. Likewise, providers should be encouraged to use the CTS-6 before prescribing EDS. Clinical relevance Limiting the use of EDS to patients with an unclear clinical diagnosis of CTS will reduce costs and improve patient care by eliminating the discomfort and time associated with this test.

Details

ISSN :
03635023
Volume :
46
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
The Journal of Hand Surgery
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....e721d5d3164b38c381c28f8fa84bc82b
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2020.11.017