Department of Occupational Therapy, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore.
Department of Occupational Therapy, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore.
J Hand Ther. 2019 Oct-Dec;32(4):444-451. doi: 10.1016/j.jht.2018.02.007. Epub 2018 Jul 18.
Patients with Green's classification grade 2 or 3 A1-pulley trigger digit (TD) were recruited and randomized to receive the proximal interphalangeal joint-blocking orthosis (PIPJ-BO) or metacarpophalangeal joint-blocking orthosis (MCPJ-BO).
TD is a common hand condition that can affect one's performance in activities of daily living. Conservative management of TD involves prescription of orthoses to facilitate recovery. No studies have evaluated the effectiveness of PIPJ-BO, optimal orthosis wear regime, and other factors affecting orthotic effectiveness.
To compare the effectiveness of PIPJ-BO vs MCPJ-BO in TD management.
Outcome measures included pain numerical rating scale, Green's classification grading, and Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand. Orthosis wear duration was also collated. Patients were followed up for 2 months, and changes between initial and final assessment score within each group and between both groups were analyzed.
Thirty-five patients with 43 TD were included in final analysis. Twenty-three TD were allocated PIPJ-BO while 20 with MCPJ-BO. Pain reduction was observed in both groups, but reduction was greater in PIPJ-BO group (P = .02). About 47.83% in PIPJ-BO group and 40% in MCPJ-BO group improved by at least 1 Green's classification grade. There was only significant improvement in Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score for PIPJ-BO group (P = .0007), and duration of orthosis wear was significantly longer in the PIPJ-BO group (P = .0010). Advancing age was found to have higher rate of orthosis failure.
Findings suggest that both orthoses are effective in reducing pain and disability and improve in triggering symptoms, with PIPJ-BO being more superior. Moreover, PIPJ-BO is less restrictive, has better cosmesis and allowed better functional performance than MCPJ-BO.
PIPJ-BO is more effective than MCPJ-BO in pain reduction and achieved better functional outcome. Orthosis wear of 24 hours for more than 8 weeks is recommended.
招募并随机分配格林分级 2 级或 3 级 A1 滑车触发指(TD)患者接受近指间关节阻滞矫形器(PIPJ-BO)或掌指关节阻滞矫形器(MCPJ-BO)治疗。
TD 是一种常见的手部疾病,会影响日常生活活动的完成。TD 的保守治疗包括开具矫形器以促进康复。目前尚无研究评估 PIPJ-BO 的有效性、最佳矫形器佩戴方案以及影响矫形器效果的其他因素。
比较 PIPJ-BO 与 MCPJ-BO 在 TD 管理中的效果。
观察指标包括疼痛数字评分量表、格林分级评分和上肢残疾问卷(Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand,DASH)。还记录了矫形器佩戴时间。患者随访 2 个月,分析每组内和组间初始评估得分与最终评估得分之间的变化。
最终纳入 35 例 43 指 TD 患者。23 指分配至 PIPJ-BO 组,20 指分配至 MCPJ-BO 组。两组患者疼痛均减轻,但 PIPJ-BO 组减轻更明显(P=0.02)。PIPJ-BO 组有 47.83%、MCPJ-BO 组有 40%患者至少格林分级改善 1 级。仅 PIPJ-BO 组上肢残疾问卷(Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand,DASH)评分有显著改善(P=0.0007),且 PIPJ-BO 组矫形器佩戴时间明显更长(P=0.0010)。年龄较大的患者矫形器失败率更高。
结果表明,两种矫形器均能有效减轻疼痛和残疾,改善触发症状,PIPJ-BO 效果更优。此外,PIPJ-BO 限制更小、美容效果更好,且允许更好的功能表现优于 MCPJ-BO。
PIPJ-BO 较 MCPJ-BO 能更有效减轻疼痛,并获得更好的功能结果。建议佩戴 24 小时以上、8 周以上。