This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Buurke, J H Articles by Baten, C T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Buurke, J H Articles by Baten, C T. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Usability of thenar eminence orthoses: report of a comparative study

Roessingh Research and Development, Enschede, The Netherlands

J H Grady

J de Vries

Rehabilitation Centre Het Roessingh, Enschede, The Netherlands

C TM Baten

Roessingh Research and Development, Enschede, The Netherlands

Objective: To determine the difference in the usability of three types of thenar eminence (TE) orthoses.

Design: Prospective comparative pre-experimental study with randomized cross-over design.

Setting: Rehabilitation centre. Subjects: Ten patients with osteoarthritis of the carpometacarpal I joint confirmed by X-ray.

Intervention: Three types of TE orthoses, made of either supple elastic material, elastic material with a semi-rigid thumb busk or a semi-rigid (polyethylene) material.

Main outcome measurements: Pain at the thenar eminence, pinch force, hand function, cosmesis, comfort and function of the TE orthosis.

Results: The supple elastic TE orthosis scores significantly better than the more rigid types on the subjects ‘comfort’, ‘function’ and the Green Test, while the semi-rigid orthosis scores best on ‘cosmesis’. The score on the subject ‘pain reduction’ shows no significant difference between the three types of TE orthoses. The scores obtained correspond with the outcome of structured interviews about the usability of the TE orthoses.

Conclusion: Eight out of 10 patients prefer the permanent use of a TE orthosis. Six patients chose the supple elastic orthosis and two chose the semi-rigid orthosis.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 13, No. 4, 288-294 (1999)
DOI: 10.1191/026921599671603077


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W Zhang, M Doherty, B F Leeb, L Alekseeva, N K Arden, J W Bijlsma, F Dincer, K Dziedzic, H J Hauselmann, G Herrero-Beaumont, et al. EULAR evidence based recommendations for the management of hand osteoarthritis: Report of a Task Force of the EULAR Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutics (ESCISIT) Ann Rheum Dis, March 1, 2007; 66(3): 377 - 388. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Ottawa Panel Members, Ottawa Methods Group, L. Brosseau, G. A Wells, P. Tugwell, M. Egan, C.-J. Dubouloz, L. Casimiro, V. A Robinson, L. Pelland, et al. Ottawa Panel Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Therapeutic Exercises and Manual Therapy in the Management of Osteoarthritis Physical Therapy, September 1, 2005; 85(9): 907 - 971. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]