Functional Outcomes After Upper Extremity Surgery for Cerebral Palsy: Comparison of High and Low Manual Ability Classification System Levels

Purpose The heterogeneity of cerebral palsy makes interpretation and prediction of outcome after upper extremity surgery difficult. We hypothesized that the outcome of upper extremity surgery for cerebral palsy is related to the Manual Ability Classification System (MACS) level. Methods We reviewed 27 patients with a mean age of 22 years, who underwent upper extremity surgery for spastic cerebral palsy at a mean follow-up of 29 months. Patients were classified into 5 MACS levels using a standardized questionnaire completed by their primary caregivers. Preoperatively and at most recent follow-up visits, patients were assessed using the House scale and patient-reported functional outcomes on a 5-point scale. We compared the outcomes of patients with high (I-II, independence in daily activities) and low (III-V, dependence in daily activities) MACS levels. Results The overall mean House scale improved from 2.9 to 4.6 postoperatively (p<.001), dressing ability from 3.7 to 4.2 (p=.005), hygiene from 4.2 to 4.9 (p=.005), and appearance from 2.4 to 4.2 (p<.001). A total of 13 patients had a high MACS level (7 had I and 6 had II) and 14 had a low MACS level (8 had III, 6 had IV, and none had V). The high-MACS group had a greater improvement according to the House scale (p=.009) and the low-MACS group had a larger improvement in hygiene status (p=.043). There were no differences in the amount of improvement in dressing ability (p=.169) and appearance (p=.765). Overall satisfaction with surgery was higher for the high-MACS group (p=.038). Conclusions The high-MACS group had a greater improvement in rating according to the House scale and higher satisfaction than the low-MACS group after upper extremity surgery for cerebral palsy in our small number of patients. This study suggests that the MACS level can be used to predict upper extremity surgery outcomes for cerebral palsy. (J Hand Surg 2010;35A:277-283. Copyright (C) 2010 by the American Society for Surgery of the Hand. All rights reserved.)