Treatment of trigger finger with metacarpophalangeal joint blocking orthosis vs relative motion extension orthosis: A randomized clinical trial

The metacarpophalangeal joint blocking orthosis (MCPJ-BO) is one of the first-line orthotic treatment for patients with trigger finger (TF). Relative motion extension orthosis (RME-O) has recently emerged as a treatment option for various hand disorders involving TF. The primary objective of this st...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of hand therapy 2024-07, Vol.37 (3), p.311-318
Hauptverfasser: Yendi, Burcu, Atilgan, Esra, Namaldi, Seda, Kuru, Cigdem Ayhan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The metacarpophalangeal joint blocking orthosis (MCPJ-BO) is one of the first-line orthotic treatment for patients with trigger finger (TF). Relative motion extension orthosis (RME-O) has recently emerged as a treatment option for various hand disorders involving TF. The primary objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of 6 weeks of orthotic treatment with the MCPJ-BO and the RME-O for pain relief. Function and satisfaction with the orthosis were assessed as secondary objectives. Randomized clinical study. Thirty patients with an average age of 50 years with Froimson stage 1-3 A1 pulley triggering participated in the study. They were randomly assigned to either the MCPJ-BO (n = 15; 10 females, five males) or the RME-O group (n = 15; 12 females, three males). The orthoses were worn full time for 6 weeks. All patients received patient education, activity modification, and flexor tendon gliding exercises as part of the rehabilitation program. Pre- and post-assessments included Numeric Pain Rating Scale, Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire, and Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology questionnaire. The Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to analyze the difference between the two groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups in pain and function before treatment (p 
ISSN:0894-1130
1545-004X
1545-004X
DOI:10.1016/j.jht.2023.10.008