Materials and methods: All Malaysian national level bowlers (n=39) were evaluated via questionnaire on their upper limb symptoms. A focused, relevant clinical examination was performed on each subject to exclude de Quervain's tenosynovitis, tennis and golfer's elbow, carpal tunnel syndrome and trigger finger. The athletes were then allowed to resume bowling for two hours before completing another symptom-related questionnaire.

Results: Pain was the predominantly observed symptom, with a predilection for the wrist, ring and middle fingers, and thumb. De Quervain's tenosynovitis was found in 53.8% (n=21) of the subjects, with 52.4% and 42.9% of them experiencing pain during and after training, respectively. Other repetitive injury-related disorders were also considerably more common than in their non-playing limb and the general population.

Material and Methods: The present investigation is a prospective randomised controlled open label study, performed at our Hand Surgery Department (Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome) from October 2018 to March 2019. The enrolled patients were divided in two groups: Group A (ALA-R 600mg once day for 60 days) and Group B (control Group, no drug administration).

Results: 134 patients (74 F, 60 M) met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In Group A, there was a statistically significant pain reduction compared to the control Group. Using the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire, there were no significant improvements in the other symptoms and function.

OBJECTIVE: Department of Neurosurgery Sarawak aimed to evaluate the surgical outcome of carpal tunnel release done over five years.

METHODS: The carpal tunnel surgeries were done under local anaesthesia (LA) given by neurosurgeons (Bupivacaine 0.5% or Lignocaine 2%). Monitored anaesthesia care (MAC) was later introduced by our hospital neuroanaesthetist in the beginning of 2018 (Target-controlled infusion propofol and boluses of fentanyl). We looked into our first 17 cases and compared these to the two anaesthesia techniques (LA versus MAC + LA) in terms of patient's pain score based on visual analogue scale (VAS).

RESULTS: Result showed MAC provided excellent pain control during and immediately after the surgery. None experienced anaesthesia complications. There was no difference in pain control at post-operation one month. Both techniques had equal good clinical outcome during patients' clinic follow up.

INTRODUCTION: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) has been described as the most common compression neuropathy. Many modalities exist for conservative treatment. Efficacy of each modality has been described in the literature. However, the effectiveness of combination of these modalities is not well established. The purpose of this study is to assess the short-term clinical outcome of conservative treatment for CTS comparing orthosis alone with combination of orthosis, nerve/tendon gliding exercises, and ultrasound therapy.

METHODS: Forty-one patients who presented to Upper Limb Reconstructive and Microsurgery Clinic, University Malaya Medical Centre with CTS and positive electrodiagnostic study were recruited. Fifteen patients had bilateral CTS. Fifty-six wrists were equally randomized to orthosis alone and a combined therapy of orthosis, nerve/tendon gliding exercise, and ultrasound therapy. All patients were required to complete the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire during the first visit and 2 months after treatment.

METHODS: All 30 of our patients underwent a standardized limited open CTR by a designated surgeon. Post operatively, they were randomized into a splinted (n=16) and a nonsplinted (n=14) group. The splint was kept for a week. Patients were reviewed at regular intervals of one week, two months and six months. At each follow up, these patients were clinically assessed for the following outcome measures: VAS (visual analogue score), 2PD (two-point discrimination), pinch grip, grip, Abductor Pollicis Brevis (APB)) power and completion of the Boston questionnaire.

RESULTS: All patients presented with significant improvement in the postoperative evaluation in the analyzed parameters within each group. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups for any of the outcome measurements at sequential and at final follow-up.