Clinical Epidemiology and Clinical Statistic Center, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2023 Nov 1;481(11):2281-2294. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002662. Epub 2023 Apr 20.
Steroid injection and splinting, which are commonly recommended nonsurgical treatments in adults with trigger finger, have been demonstrated to effectively relieve pain and improve function. However, to our knowledge, there have been no direct comparisons of pain relief and function improvement with splinting alone, steroid injection alone, or a combination of splinting and steroid injection in patients with this diagnosis.
QUESTION/PURPOSE: Are there differences in pain reduction and functional improvement in adults with trigger finger treated with splinting alone, steroid injection alone, and a combination of splinting and steroid injection at 6, 12, and 52 weeks after the intervention?
Between May 2021 and December 2021, we treated 165 adult patients for trigger finger at an academic university hospital. Based on prespecified criteria, all patients we saw during that period were eligible, but 27% (45 of 165) were excluded because they had received a previous local corticosteroid injection (n = 10) or they had concomitant carpal tunnel syndrome (n = 14), first carpometacarpal joint arthritis (n = 3), osteoarthritis of the hand (n = 6), de Quervain disease (n = 3), multiple-digit trigger finger (n = 6), or pregnancy during the study period (n = 3). After screening, 120 patients were randomized to receive either splinting (n = 43), steroid injection (n = 40), or splinting plus steroid injection (n = 37). Patients were randomly assigned to the different treatments using computer-generated block randomization (block of six). Sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes were used in the allocation concealment process. Both the allocator and the outcome assessor were blinded. Splinting involved the patient wearing a fixed metacarpophalangeal joint orthosis in the neutral position at least 8 hours per day for 6 consecutive weeks. Steroid injection was performed using 1 mL of 1% lidocaine without epinephrine and 1 mL of triamcinolone acetonide (10 mg/mL) injected directly into the flexor tendon sheath. No patients were lost to follow-up or had treatment failure (that is, the patient had persistent pain or triggering with the trigger finger treatment and requested additional medical management including additional splinting, steroid injection, or surgery) at 6 or 12 weeks after the intervention, and at 52 weeks, there was no difference in loss to follow-up among the treatment groups. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed with all 120 patients, and a per-protocol analysis was conducted with 86 patients after excluding patients who were lost to follow-up or had treatment failure. Primary outcomes evaluated were VAS pain reduction and improvement in Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) scores at 6, 12, and 52 weeks after the intervention. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) values were 1 and 10.9 for the VAS and MHQ, respectively.
There were no clinically important differences in VAS pain scores among the three treatment groups at any timepoint, in either the intention-to-treat or the per-protocol analyses. Likewise, there were no clinically important differences in MHQ scores at any timepoint in either the intention-to-treat or the per-protocol analyses.
Splinting alone is recommended as the initial treatment for adults with trigger finger because there were no clinically important differences between splinting alone and steroid injection alone in terms of pain reduction and symptom or functional improvement up to 1 year. The combination of steroid injection and splinting is disadvantageous because the benefits in terms of pain reduction and symptom or functional improvement are not different from those achieved with steroid injection or splinting alone.
Level I, therapeutic study.
在扳机指的成人患者中,类固醇注射和夹板固定是常用的非手术治疗方法,已被证明可有效缓解疼痛并改善功能。但是,据我们所知,在患有这种疾病的患者中,单独夹板固定、单独类固醇注射或夹板固定和类固醇注射联合治疗在缓解疼痛和改善功能方面,尚未进行过直接比较。
问题/目的:在接受单独夹板固定、单独类固醇注射和夹板固定联合类固醇注射治疗的扳机指成人患者中,在干预后 6、12 和 52 周时,在减轻疼痛和改善功能方面是否存在差异?
在 2021 年 5 月至 2021 年 12 月期间,我们在一所学术大学医院治疗了 165 例扳机指成年患者。根据预先规定的标准,我们看到的所有患者都符合条件,但由于先前接受过局部皮质类固醇注射(n = 10)或同时患有腕管综合征(n = 14)、第一腕掌关节炎(n = 3)、手骨关节炎(n = 6)、德奎文病(n = 3)、多发性扳机指(n = 6)或在研究期间怀孕(n = 3),我们排除了 27%(45/165)的患者。筛选后,120 名患者被随机分配接受夹板固定(n = 43)、类固醇注射(n = 40)或夹板固定加类固醇注射(n = 37)。使用计算机生成的块随机化(块为 6)对患者进行随机分组。顺序编号、不透明、密封的信封用于分配隐藏过程。分配者和结果评估者均处于盲态。夹板固定包括患者每天至少 8 小时佩戴掌指关节中立位的固定支具,持续 6 周。类固醇注射是将 1 mL 1%利多卡因(不含肾上腺素)和 1 mL 曲安奈德丙酮(10 mg/mL)直接注射到屈肌腱鞘中。在干预后 6 或 12 周,没有患者失访或治疗失败(即患者仍有疼痛或扳机指治疗引起的触发,并要求接受其他医疗管理,包括额外的夹板固定、类固醇注射或手术),在 52 周时,各组之间的失访率没有差异。对所有 120 名患者进行意向治疗分析,对失访或治疗失败的 86 名患者进行方案治疗分析。主要结局评估是干预后 6、12 和 52 周时的视觉模拟评分(VAS)疼痛减轻和密歇根手结果问卷(MHQ)评分改善。VAS 和 MHQ 的最小临床重要差异(MCID)值分别为 1 和 10.9。
在意向治疗或方案治疗分析中,在任何时间点,三组治疗组的 VAS 疼痛评分均无临床重要差异。同样,在任何时间点,意向治疗或方案治疗分析中,MHQ 评分均无临床重要差异。
单独夹板固定被推荐作为扳机指成人的初始治疗方法,因为在缓解疼痛和症状或功能改善方面,单独夹板固定与单独类固醇注射之间没有临床重要差异,长达 1 年。类固醇注射和夹板固定的联合治疗是不利的,因为在缓解疼痛和症状或功能改善方面的益处与单独使用类固醇注射或夹板固定没有不同。
I 级,治疗研究。