Page 34 - Read Online

Lin et al. Plast Aesthet Res 2024;11:8 https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2347-9264.2023.57 Page 3 of 12

Figure 1. Flow diagram outlining the review process. Reasons for exclusion of full-text studies are listed above. Covidence systematic
review software, Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia.

Selection process, inclusion and exclusion criteria
Studies that provided original data, including prospective studies, retrospective studies, and clinical trials,
were included for analysis. Studies were excluded if the primary language was not English. Studies of NT
surgery in peripheral nerve and brachial plexus injuries were also excluded.

Data collection and synthesis
From the included studies, information on operative details, clinical assessments including hand function
tests, strength measurements and patient-reported outcomes were extracted. A review and summary of all
relevant studies was performed. Assessment tools and outcomes measures were described for each study
and categorized based on previously reported methodology . The first author performed the initial article
[24]
reviews and compiled a list of assessments used. Both authors reviewed and categorized the measures and
organized them for presentation in the results section.

RESULTS
A total of 870 results were retrieved from the database literature search and imported to Endnote. This was
cross-referenced to the senior author’s list of relevant articles and only one additional reference was added.
There were 389 duplicate citations that were identified and removed, and the remaining 481 citations were
included for further title and abstract screening analysis. A total of 39 full-text studies were extracted and 13
were excluded with reasons [Figure 1]. A total of 26 unique studies that met inclusion criteria were
published between 1966 and 2022. The findings are summarized in Tables 1 and 2.