Nerve injuries to the volar aspect of the hand: A comparison of the reliability of the Weber static test versus the gauze test

摘要

Abstract When examining lacerations to the volar aspect of the hand a gauze test may usually be performed to detect nerve injuries. However, published literature suggests that its sensitivity and specificity are lower than 100%. The aim of this study was to determine whether a Weber static (main hypothesis) and dynamic test or a Semmes-Weinstein test (secondary hypotheses) could be a more reliable test than the gauze test to rule out any nerve injury and avoid unnecessary wound explorations. Our case series included a total of 102 patients presenting with 123 palmar lacerations and 158 nerve injuries. On arrival at the emergency department, every patient was tested for epicritic sensation at the pulp of the injured and contralateral fingers with the Weber static and dynamic tests and the Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test. All lacerations underwent exploration under anesthetic to rule out nerve injury. The sensitivities of the gauze test, the Weber static test, the Weber dynamic test and the Semmes Weinstein monofilament test were proven to be 82.5%, 98.6%, 97.9% and 86.7% respectively. The specificities of the gauze test, the Weber static test, the Weber dynamic test and the Semmes Weinstein monofilament test were 79%, 79%, 79% and 78.9% respectively. Examination of lacerations to the volar aspect of the hand to rule out any nerve injuries should include a Weber static test instead of a gauze test. A negative Weber static test should not however discourage a surgical exploration of the laceration to rule out tendinous or vascular injury.