Predictors of Recurrence After Corticosteroid Injection for Trigger Digits

National Benchmarks for the Efficacy of Trigger Finger and the Risk Factors Associated With Failure

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of single and multiple corticosteroid injections used for symptomatic trigger finger. The rates of subsequent injections and the rate of tendon sheath release are reported along with the identification of risk factors correlated with failure of injection.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a national healthcare database was conducted identifying patients with a diagnosis of trigger finger or thumb. Inclusion required a tendon sheath injection on the same day or within six weeks of diagnosis. Patient cohorts were further stratified based on treatment success and those requiring additional injections within 6 months or surgery within 1 year of initial diagnosis.

RESULTS

Thirty-one thousand seven hundred fifty-one patients met inclusion criteria and underwent an initial injection within the study period. The efficacy of initial, second, and third injection was 66.3%, 79.4%, and 79.6%, respectively. Of the patients who failed an injection, 9.4% had tendon sheath release after a primary injection, 23.1% had surgery after a second injection, and 30.4% had surgery after a third injection. Only obesity (OR 1.2; P < 0.0001) and concomitant diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (OR 1.4; P < 0.0001) were found to be significant for injection failure on multivariate logistic regression analysis.

DISCUSSION

Overall corticosteroid injections were effective in greater than 65% of patients. This information may help guide treatment practice because there seems to be continued additional benefit to repeat corticosteroid injections after injection failure.

Warning Signs: Occult Diabetes and Dysglycemia in the Hand Surgery Patient Population

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus often exists for many years prior to diagnosis, and very little is known about the role of the prediagnosis stage of metabolic impairment in contributing to hand and upper-extremity pathology. The goal of this study is to determine the prevalence of undiagnosed glucose dysregulation in patients presenting with the 2 most commonly treated conditions of the hand and wrist.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed of hand surgery patients with no established diagnosis of prediabetes or diabetes referred for a 2-hour glucose tolerance test according to American Diabetes Association criteria. Patients were divided into 3 groups: peripheral neuropathies, trigger finger, and controls with various upper-extremity diagnoses. Rates of undiagnosed prediabetes and diabetes were compared between groups, including subgroup analysis of patients based on unilateral or bilateral presentation. Binary logistic regression analysis was also used to calculate odds ratios for multiple variables.

RESULTS

Patients with neuropathy had a significantly higher incidence of undiagnosed dysglycemia compared with the control group. Of those patients, 51.3% were prediabetic and 12.8% were diabetic. The control group had significantly lower rates. Within the bilateral neuropathy patients, 59.6% had prediabetes and 15.4% had diabetes, versus 34.6% with prediabetes and 7.7% with diabetes in the unilateral group.

CONCLUSIONS

Hand surgeons encounter a patient population with high rates of undiagnosed prediabetes and diabetes, with some presentations as much as 6 times higher than the general population. Certain patient presentations should prompt appropriate diagnostic testing and referral, especially those presenting with bilateral compression neuropathy and elevated body mass index.

Patient preference for trigger finger treatment

BACKGROUND

Trigger finger is a common disorder of the hand that can cause disabling symptoms. Treatment options range from conservative management with observation and splinting, to surgical release, but there is currently not a consensus on a treatment algorithm.

AIM

To determine patient preference for the treatment of trigger finger using an online survey.

METHODS

An online crowdsourcing platform, Amazon Mechanical Turk, was used to recruit participants for this study. Participants were led through a scenario in which they were diagnosed with trigger finger. They were then asked to rank their preference of treatment options from the following: Observation, splinting, corticosteroid injection, surgery. The results of the surveys were then analyzed using R software.

RESULTS

Of 323 participants completed the survey. 7 participants were excluded because they failed to correctly answer the attention question, leaving 316 participants whose results were included. As a first choice for treatment 117 (37%) of the included participants chose observation, 86 (27%) chose splinting, 61 (19%) chose corticosteroid injection, and 52 (16%) chose surgery. The mean rank for observation was 2.26, for splinting was 2.30, for corticosteroid injection was 2.53, and for surgery was 2.91. The ranking of each treatment option was statistically different (P value < 0.05) from the others except for observation and splinting.

CONCLUSION

The practice of shared decision making with patients is imperative to providing the best care possible. The results from this study, especially the preference for less invasive treatment, may help providers better frame discussion around treatment options of trigger fingers. This in turn, may increase patient satisfaction in the treatment of trigger finger.

Comparison of Different Dosages and Volumes of Triamcinolone in the Treatment of Stenosing Tenosynovitis: A Prospective, Blinded, Randomized Trial

Background

Stenosing tenosynovitis is a condition due to a size mismatch between the flexor tendons and the first annular pulley. Corticosteroid injection is the mainstay treatment. The purpose of this study is to compare different dosages and volumes of triamcinolone in the treatment of primary stenosing tenosynovitis.

Methods

Patients with primary Quinnell grades 1 or 2 stenosing tenosynovitis were recruited in this prospective, blinded, randomized trial. Patients were randomized into 1 of 2 groups. Group A received 0.25 mL of triamcinolone 40 mg/mL, mixed with 0.25 mL of 1% lidocaine with epinephrine (10 mg of triamcinolone, 0.5 mL in total volume). Group B received 0.5 mL of triamcinolone 40 mg/mL, mixed with 0.5 mL of 1% lidocaine with epinephrine (20 mg of triamcinolone, 1 mL in total volume). Patients were assessed by a blinded hand therapist at 2 and 4 weeks, and by a blinded hand surgeon at 6 weeks. The primary outcome was complete symptom resolution at 6 weeks. Both per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses were performed.

Results

One hundred ninety-one patients were recruited from 2009 to 2018. Eighty-two and 77 patients had complete data in group A and B, respectively. There was no difference in success rates in complete symptom resolution at 6 weeks between group A (59.8%) and group B (62.3%). The mean visual analogue pain scores on injection were 4.31 ± 2.11 for group A and 4.30 ± 2.09 for group B.

Conclusions

Triamcinolone 10 mg was as effective as 20 mg in the resolution of symptoms of Quinnell grade 1 or 2 stenosing tenosynovitis at 6 weeks.

The impact of type 2 diabetes on the development of tendinopathy

Tendinopathy is a chronic and often painful condition affecting both professional athletes and sedentary subjects. It is a multi-etiological disorder caused by the interplay among overload, ageing, smoking, obesity (OB) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). Several studies have identified a strong association between tendinopathy and T2D, with increased risk of tendon pain, rupture and worse outcomes after tendon repair in patients with T2D. Moreover, consequent immobilization due to tendon disorder has a strong impact on diabetes management by reducing physical activity and worsening the quality of life. Multiple investigations have been performed to analyse the causal role of the individual metabolic factors occurring in T2D on the development of tendinopathy. Chronic hyperglycaemia, advanced glycation end-products, OB and insulin resistance have been shown to contribute to the development of diabetic tendinopathy. This review aims to explore the relationship between tendinopathy and T2D, in order to define the contribution of metabolic factors involved in the degenerative process and to discuss possible strategies for the clinical management of diabetic tendinopathy.

Risk Factors Associated With Progression to Surgical Release After Injection of Trigger Digits

Introduction:

The mainstay of trigger finger treatment is a corticosteroid injection of the affected digits and is associated with a very high success rate. However, some patients do not respond to nonsurgical management and undergo subsequent surgical release. The purpose of this study is to investigate the comorbidities that predispose patients to progressing from injection to surgical release.

Methods:

Patient data were obtained from a national insurance database. All patients aged 20 years or older who underwent trigger digit injection were included. Any injection that did not specify the digit was excluded. Subsequent procedures, including repeat injection and surgical release, were identified using relevant Current Procedural Terminology codes. A multivariate model was constructed to evaluate potential risk factors for requiring release after prior injection of the same digit. Stepwise backward selection was used to retain significant variables.

Results:

A total of 42,537 trigger digits were identified in 31,830 patients, most of whom were female. The right hand was affected more commonly than the left. The middle and ring fingers were the most commonly affected digits. Over 80% of all trigger digits underwent only a single injection, and approximately 90% of injected digits did not require subsequent release. In the multivariate model, factors associated with higher risk of release were male sex, involvement of additional digits, multiple injections of the same digit, chronic pulmonary disease, HIV/AIDS, obesity, alcohol abuse, and depression. The model also found small fingers to be less likely to progress to release.

Discussion:

Patients with the risk factors identified in this study are more likely to progress to surgical release after trigger finger injection. Although prospective studies are required, the information may be beneficial in counseling patients and their treatment options.

A cost-utility analysis of open A1 pulley release for the treatment of trigger finger

The United Kingdom National Institute for Health and Care Excellence considers a procedure to be cost-effective if the cost per quality-adjusted life year gained falls below a threshold of £20,000-£30,000 (€22,600-33,900; US$24,600-$36,900). This study used cost per quality-adjusted life year methodology to determine the cost-utility ratio of A1 pulley release. Pre- and postoperative EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 Likert scores were collected prospectively over 6 years from 192 patients. The median pre- and postoperative indices derived from the EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 Likert scores were significantly different at 0.77 and 0.80. The mean life expectancy was 21 years. The mean number of quality-adjusted life years gained was 1 per patient. The mean cost-utility ratio per patient was £32,308 (€36,508; US$39,730) and £16,154 (€18,254; US$19,869) at 1 and 2 years, respectively. Provided the benefit of surgery was maintained over the remaining life expectancy, the cost-utility ratio decreased to £1537 (€1737; US$1891) per patient. A1 pulley release is cost-effective provided the benefit is maintained for 2 years. The procedure is also associated with a statistically significant improvement in quality of life.Level of evidence: III.

Assessment of Surgeon Variation in Adherence to Evidence-Based Recommendations for Treatment of Trigger Finger

IMPORTANCE

Stenosing tenosynovitis (trigger finger) affects approximately 2% of the population. Given the prevalence of trigger finger and rising health care costs, adherence to the cost-effective and evidence-based treatment algorithm will permit better outcomes and allocation of resources.

OBJECTIVES

To examine treatment patterns for trigger finger and to determine surgeon-level and patient-level factors that influence adherence to evidence-based treatment.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective population-based cohort study examined deidentified claims for treatment of trigger finger from a national insurance provider using the Clinformatics Data Mart database. Patients were included if they were 18 years or older and treated from January 1, 2002, through December 31, 2016 (excluding a washout period from July 1, 2008, until June 30, 2010), with a new diagnosis of single-digit trigger finger. Data were analyzed from December 21, 2018, through April 28, 2019.

EXPOSURES

Cost-effective and evidence-based research published in July 2009 for the treatment of trigger finger.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

After excluding the 1-year washout period on either side of July 1, 2009, adherence to the recommended treatment algorithm of 2 corticosteroid injections before surgical release of trigger finger was compared with practice before publication of research supporting this cost-effective and evidence-based approach.

RESULTS

In this analysis of 83 667 patients with trigger finger, 52 698 (63.0%) were women, and 20 045 (24.0%) had type 1 or 2 diabetes. Mean (SD) age was 61 (13) years. From 2002 to 2016, an overall increasing trend in adherence to the cost-effective and evidence-based approach to treatment was noted, with no significant increase in adherence in the postpublication era (67.5% vs 73.3%; P = .27). Substantial variation in adherence was observed at the surgeon level (intraclass correlation, 33%). Plastic surgeons had no change in adherence over time compared with orthopedic surgeons (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.98-1.02; P = .90), whereas general surgeons had increased adherence (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.06; P < .001). Higher-volume surgeons were also more adherent to these evidence-based recommendations (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.53-1.65; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found substantial surgeon-level variation in adherence to evidence-based treatment of trigger finger. Surgeon specialty and volume were associated with differences in adherence. Efforts to understand surgeon barriers to implementation, regardless of physician specialty, appear to be necessary, and better implementation strategies may permit increased uptake of evidence-based treatment of trigger finger.