Stark 1996.

Methods	RCT
Participants	20 participants with bilateral CTS (average age 53 years), 1 hand with OCTR and 1 with ECTR (2 to 4 months' interval). No information on sex CTS was confirmed clinically and with EMG
Interventions	1‐portal ECTR (Agee) vs OCTR
Outcomes	Follow‐up at 2, 4 and 12 weeks and 8 months Clinical evaluation, movement of hand and fingers, 2‐point discrimination, grip strength
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information given
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information given
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	No information given. Participants and personnel could not be blinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	No information given. Participants and personnel could not be blinded
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No participants lost to follow‐up
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	No P values and SDs of all outcomes. No values for some measurements (eg grip strength)
Other bias	Unclear risk	No information on baseline differences. No information given for financial support