rss
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2009;80:1369-1374 doi:10.1136/jnnp.2009.180844
  • Research paper

The diagnostic value of provocative clinical tests in ulnar neuropathy at the elbow is marginal

  1. R Beekman1,2,
  2. A H C M L Schreuder1,
  3. C A M Rozeman2,
  4. P J Koehler1,
  5. B M J Uitdehaag3
  1. 1
    Department of Neurology, Atrium Medical Centre, Heerlen, The Netherlands
  2. 2
    Department of Neurophysiology, Atrium Medical Centre, Heerlen, The Netherlands
  3. 3
    Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Dr R Beekman, Department of Neurology, Atrium Medical Centre, PO Box 4446, 6401 CX, Heerlen, The Netherlands; r.beekman{at}atriummc.nl
  • Received 17 April 2009
  • Revised 11 May 2009
  • Accepted 19 May 2009
  • Published Online First 23 June 2009

Abstract

Background: Provocative clinical tests are often performed in the diagnosis of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow (UNE) although the evidence for the usefulness of these tests is limited. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic value of provocative clinical tests in the diagnosis of UNE in a relevant spectrum of patients and controls.

Methods: A prospective cohort study was performed in consecutive patients clinically suspected of having UNE. All patients underwent a neurological examination and four commonly used provocative clinical tests (Tinel’s test, flexion compression test, palpating for local ulnar nerve tenderness and nerve thickening). Subsequently, in all patients a reference standard test comprising electrophysiological studies and neurosonography was independently assessed.

Results: 192 eligible patients completed the study protocol. UNE was diagnosed in 137 and an alternative diagnosis was made in 55 patients. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were as follows: Tinel’s test 62%, 53%, 77% and 30%; flexion compression test 61%, 40%, 72% and 29%; palpating for nerve thickening 28%, 87%, 84% and 33%; and palpating for nerve tenderness 32%, 80%, 80% and 32%. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves showed that the added value of one or more provocative tests over routine clinical examination is minimal.

Conclusion: The diagnostic value of provocative clinical tests in UNE is poor.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and Peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

This Article

  1. All Versions of this Article:
    1. jnnp.2009.180844v1
    2. 80/12/1369 most recent

Services

  1. Request permissions

Responses

  1. Submit a response
  2. No responses published

Social bookmarking

Latest from Practical Neurology

Latest from Practical Neurology

Register for free content


Free sample
This recent issue is free to all users to allow everyone the opportunity to see the full scope and typical content of JNNP.
View free sample issue >>

Free archive
The full back archive is now available for JNNP. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006, back to volume 1 issue 1.
Register to access the free archive >>

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

  • BMJ Careers - Latest Neurology and Neurosurgery jobs

    Latest neurology and neurosurgery jobs