We investigated the non-operative management of trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis with a three-dimensional (3-D) printed patient-customized brace compared with a conventional plaster brace. Fifty-two patients with symptomatic trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis were enrolled in a 9-week crossover study, which was designed as a randomized controlled trial of two periods of 4-week brace therapies. The primary outcome was patient satisfaction measured with the Dutch version of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology questionnaire survey. Secondary outcomes included pain, patient-reported function, functional hand strength measured by pinch and grip strength, and compliance assessed through a daily log of self-reported brace usage. The 3-D printed patient-customized brace had higher patient satisfaction and compliance than the conventional plaster brace. Patients preferred the 3-D printed customized brace (93%) rather than the conventional plaster brace (7%). This suggests that the 3-D printed patient-customized brace is effective in the non-operative management of trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis.
BaniMAArazpourMKashaniRVMousaviMEHutchinsSW.Comparison of custom-made and prefabricated neoprene splinting in patients with the first carpometacarpal joint osteoarthritis. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2013,
8: 232–7.
3.
BeatonDEWrightJGKatzJN.Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005,
87: 1038–46.
4.
BertozziLValdesKVantiCNegriniSPillastriniPVillafañeJH.Investigation of the effect of conservative interventions in thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Disabil Rehabil. 2015,
37: 2025–43.
5.
BijlsmaJWBerenbaumFLafeberFP.Osteoarthritis: an update with relevance for clinical practice. Lancet. 2011,
377: 2115–26.
6.
BuurkeJHGradyJHde VriesJBatenCT.Usability of thenar eminence orthoses: report of a comparative study. Clin Rehabil. 1999,
13: 288–94.
7.
ColditzJC.The biomechanics of a thumb carpometacarpal immobilization splint: design and fitting. J Hand Ther. 2000,
13: 228–35.
8.
CollinsSLMooreRAMcQuayHJ.The visual analogue pain intensity scale: what is moderate pain in millimetres?Pain. 1997,
72: 95–7.
9.
De GrootJAJanssenKJZwindermanAHBossuytPMReitsmaJBMoonsKG.Correcting for partial verification bias: a comparison of methods. Ann Epidemiol. 2011,
21: 139–48.
10.
FaulFErdfelderEBuchnerALangAG.Statistical power analyses using g*power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009,
41: 1149–60.
11.
FessEE.The need for reliability and validity in hand assessment instruments. J Hand Surg Am. 1986,
11: 621–3.
12.
GrüschkeJSReinders-MesselinkHAvan der VegtAEvan der SluisCK.User perspectives on orthoses for thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis. J Hand Ther. 2019,
32: 435–43.
13.
HaskettSBackmanCPorterBGoyertJPalejkoG.A crossover trial of custom-made and commercially available wrist splints in adults with inflammatory arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2004,
51: 792–9.
14.
JonesBJarvisPLewisJAEbbuttAF.Trials to assess equivalence: the importance of rigorous methods. Bmj. 1996,
313: 36–9.
15.
JosephMConstantRRickloffMMezzioAValdesK.A survey of client experiences with orthotics using the quest 2.0. J Hand Ther. 2018,
31: 538–43.e1.
16.
KellgrenJHLawrenceJS.Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1957,
16: 494–502.
17.
KjekenISmedslundGMoeRHSlatkowsky-ChristensenBUhligTHagenKB.Systematic review of design and effects of splints and exercise programs in hand osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011,
63: 834–48.
18.
LaddALWeissAPCriscoJJ, et al.
The thumb carpometacarpal joint: anatomy, hormones, and biomechanics. Instr Course Lect. 2013,
62: 165–79.
19.
MarshallMvan der WindtDNichollsEMyersHDziedzicK.Radiographic thumb osteoarthritis: frequency, patterns and associations with pain and clinical assessment findings in a community-dwelling population. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011,
50: 735–9.
20.
Martín-MerinoECalderón-LarrañagaAHawleyS, et al.
The impact of different strategies to handle missing data on both precision and bias in a drug safety study: a multidatabase multinational population-based cohort study. Clin Epidemiol. 2018,
10: 643–54.
21.
MathiowetzVWeberKVollandGKashmanN.Reliability and validity of grip and pinch strength evaluations. J Hand Surg Am. 1984,
9: 222–6.
22.
PooleJUPellegriniVDJr.Arthritis of the thumb basal joint complex. J Hand Ther. 2000,
13: 91–107.
23.
SchmidtRTToewsJV.Grip strength as measured by the Jamar dynamometer.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1970,
51: 321–7.
24.
SelaYSeftchickJWangWLBaratzME.The diagnostic clinical value of thumb metacarpal grind, pressure-shear, flexion, and extension tests for carpometacarpal osteoarthritis. J Hand Ther. 2019,
32: 35–40.
25.
SillemHBackmanCLMillerWCLiLC.Comparison of two carpometacarpal stabilizing splints for individuals with thumb osteoarthritis.J Hand Ther. 2011,
24: 216–25; quiz 126; discussion 227–30.
26.
SpaansAJvan MinnenLPKonMSchuurmanAHSchreudersARVermeulenGM.Conservative treatment of thumb base osteoarthritis: a systematic review. J Hand Surg Am. 2015,
40: 16–21.e1-6.
27.
VegtAEGrondRGrüschkeJS, et al.
The effect of two different orthoses on pain, hand function, patient satisfaction and preference in patients with thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis: a multicentre, crossover, randomised controlled trial. Bone Joint J. 2017,
99-b: 237–44.
28.
VillafañeJHValdesK.Reliability of pinch strength testing in elderly subjects with unilateral thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis. J Phys Ther Sci. 2014,
26: 993–5.
29.
WajonAAdaL.No difference between two splint and exercise regimens for people with osteoarthritis of the thumb: a randomised controlled trial. Aust J Physiother. 2005,
51: 245–9.
30.
WeissSLaStayoPMillsABramletD.Prospective analysis of splinting the first carpometacarpal joint: an objective, subjective, and radiographic assessment. J Hand Ther. 2000,
13: 218–26.
31.
WeissSLastayoPMillsABramletD.Splinting the degenerative basal joint: custom-made or prefabricated neoprene?J Hand Ther. 2004,
17: 401–6.
32.
WellekSBlettnerM.On the proper use of the crossover design in clinical trials: part 18 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications.Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012,
109: 276–81.
33.
WesselsRDDe WitteLP.Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of Quest 2.0 with users of various types of assistive devices. Disabil Rehabil. 2003,
25: 267–72.
34.
WoodsJRWilliamsJGTavelM.The two-period crossover design in medical research. Ann Intern Med. 1989,
110: 560–6.
