http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/17946/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/15189/ 2008-01-01T00:00:00Z PURPOSE: For some disorders, such as radial tunnel syndrome (RTS), no randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials are available. To gain insight into the effectiveness of conservative and surgical interventions for treating RTS, we systematically reviewed all available observational studies on treatment of RTS. Although the validity of case series is inferior to that of controlled trials, the case series might provide valuable data about the efficacy of treatment options. METHODS: A literature search and additional reference checking resulted in 21 eligible case series for this review. Based on previous checklists, we constructed a new quality assessment and rating system to analyze the included case series. The methodological quality was assessed, and data extraction was performed. Studies with less than 50% of the maximum points on the methodological quality assessment were considered inadequate and were excluded from the analysis. To summarize the results according to the rating system for the strength of the scientific evidence for these case series, we introduced 4 levels: (1) tendency, (2) slight tendency, (3) conflicting tendency, and (4) no tendency. RESULTS: After the methodological quality assessment, 6 articles were included in the final analysis. They all reported on surgical treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There is a tendency that surgical decompression of the radial tunnel might be effective in patients with RTS. The effectiveness of conservative treatments for RTS is unknown because, for most treatments, no studies were available. Additional high-quality controlled studies are needed to assess the level of conclusive evidence for surgical treatment and also to evaluate conservative treatments for RTS. For this, we recommend a multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Due to the lack of a clear protocol for diagnosing RTS, a reliable and valid diagnostic tool should be developed. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/15682/ 2006-06-01T00:00:00Z For the posterior interosseus nerve syndrome (PINS), no randomised controlled trials or controlled clinical trials about the effectiveness of interventions are available; only case series can be found. Although the validity of case series is inferior to controlled trials, they may provide valuable data about the efficacy of treatment options. Therefore, we systematically reviewed all available observational studies on treatment of PINS. A literature search and additional reference checking was done. On the basis of previous checklists, we constructed a quality assessment and rating system to analyse the included case series. Studies with less than 50% of the maximum points on the methodological quality assessment were excluded from the analysis. The results are summarised according to a rating system for the strength of the scientific evidence. Six eligible case series for this review were found. After the data extraction and methodological quality assessment, two higher quality studies that evaluated the effectiveness of surgical decompression of the PIN were included in the final analysis. There is a tendency for the effectiveness of surgical decompression of the PIN in patients with PINS. The effectiveness of a conservative treatment for PINS is unknown because no higher quality studies are available. Additional high-quality controlled studies are needed to assess the level of 'conclusive evidence' for surgical treatment. There is also a need for high-quality controlled trials into the effectiveness of conservative treatments for PINS.